McDonald v. Nicholson

Fourth Circuit

McDonald v. Nicholson

593 F. App'x 236

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 19, 2015·No. No. 15-6007·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM:

Sentellus McDonald appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), 1915A(b)(l) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. McDonald v. Nicholson, No. 5:14-ct-03103-H (E.D.N.C. June 10, 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM:

Sentellus McDonald appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), 1915A(b)(l) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. McDonald v. Nicholson, No. 5:14-ct-03103-H (E.D.N.C. June 10, 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.

McDonald v. Nicholson, 593 F. App'x 236 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

593 F. App'x 236 (McDonald v. Nicholson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related