Matthews v. Pauze

577 F. App'x 213
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 1, 2014
DocketNo. 14-6178
StatusPublished

This text of 577 F. App'x 213 (Matthews v. Pauze) 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
Matthews v. Pauze, 577 F. App'x 213 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alexander Matthews appeals the district court’s order dismissing with prejudice Defendants Hanley, Frandsen, and Patricco, for failure to state a claim 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), and dismissing without prejudice his claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act as dupli-cative. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Matthews v. Pauze, No. 1:13-CV-01020-LO-TGB (E.D.Va. Jan. 22, 2014). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
577 F. App'x 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-pauze-ca4-2014.