Lasure v. SC Mental Health

Fourth Circuit

Lasure v. SC Mental Health

675 F. App'x 357

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 3, 2017

DocketNo. 16-7338

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 675 F. App'x 357 (Lasure v. SC Mental Health) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lasure v. SC Mental Health, 675 F. App'x 357 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alfred William LaSure appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, as modified, and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. LaSure v. SC Mental Health, No. 9:15-cv-01357-RBH, 2016 WL 5027589 (D.S.C. Sept. 20, 2016). In light of this disposition, we deny as moot the Ap-pellees’ motion to strike LaSure’s second informal opening brief and amended informal opening brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alfred William LaSure appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, as modified, and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. LaSure v. SC Mental Health, No. 9:15-cv-01357-RBH, 2016 WL 5027589 (D.S.C. Sept. 20, 2016). In light of this disposition, we deny as moot the Ap-pellees’ motion to strike LaSure’s second informal opening brief and amended informal opening brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

675 F. App'x 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lasure-v-sc-mental-health-ca4-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack