Marrow v. Roanoke Electric Membership Corp.

224 F. App'x 241

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Victor A. Marrow 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 Marrow v. Roanoke Elec. Membership Corp., No. 5:06-cv-00130-BR (E.D.N.C. Aug. 7, 2006). We deny Appellees’ motion for sanctions under Fed. R.App. P. 38 because we cannot conclude Marrow pursued this litigation for malicious purposes, see Dyntel Corp. v. Ebner, 120 F.3d 488, 493 (4th Cir.1997), or has previously filed numerous frivolous suits or appeals, see Foley v. Fix, 106 F.3d 556, 558 (4th Cir.1997). 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.