Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales

Fourth Circuit

Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales

62 F. App'x 537

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 1, 2003·No. No. 03-1062·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

William M. Lewis, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales, No. CA-02-741-3 (E.D.Va. Dec. 12, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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

PER CURIAM.

William M. Lewis, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales, No. CA-02-741-3 (E.D.Va. Dec. 12, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales, 62 F. App'x 537 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

62 F. App'x 537 (Lewis v. Ugly Duckling Car Sales) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related