Mack v. Drew

466 F. App'x 265
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 16, 2012
DocketNo. 11-7229
StatusPublished

This text of 466 F. App'x 265 (Mack v. Drew) 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
Mack v. Drew, 466 F. App'x 265 (4th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Bennie A. Mack, Jr. appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions to reconsider and reinstating the court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Mack v. Drew, No. 9:09-cv-02891-JFA (D.S.C. Aug. 8, 2011); 2011 WL 2632610 (July 5, 2011); 2011 WL 765565 (Feb. 24, 2011). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
466 F. App'x 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mack-v-drew-ca4-2012.