Martin v. Lott

Fourth Circuit

Martin v. Lott

407 F. App'x 761

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 18, 2011·No. No. 10-1301·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carlos Edward Martin appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in part to defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Lott, No. 3:07-cv-03782-JFA, 2010 WL 547175 (D.S.C. Feb. 9, 2010). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carlos Edward Martin appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in part to defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Lott, No. 3:07-cv-03782-JFA, 2010 WL 547175 (D.S.C. Feb. 9, 2010). 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.

Martin v. Lott, 407 F. App'x 761 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

407 F. App'x 761 (Martin v. Lott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related