May v. Solomon

Fourth Circuit

May v. Solomon

615 F. App'x 828

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 14, 2015

DocketNo. 15-6815

StatusPublished

This text of 615 F. App'x 828 (May v. Solomon) 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

May v. Solomon, 615 F. App'x 828 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Anthony May appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his challenges to his disciplinary convictions for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and dismissing without prejudice the remainder of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. May v. Solomon, No. 5:14 — ct— 03318-FL, 2015 WL 2190880 (E.D.N.C. May 11, 2015). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Anthony May appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his challenges to his disciplinary convictions for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and dismissing without prejudice the remainder of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. May v. Solomon, No. 5:14 — ct— 03318-FL, 2015 WL 2190880 (E.D.N.C. May 11, 2015). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

615 F. App'x 828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/may-v-solomon-ca4-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack