McElhiney v. Keller

Fourth Circuit

McElhiney v. Keller

568 F. App'x 249

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 28, 2014·No. No. 13-8018·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Bertram Norman McElhiney, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying [250] relief 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. McElhiney v. Keller; No. 1:12-cv-00037-R JC, 2013 WL 6237983 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 3, 2013). 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

PER CURIAM:

Bertram Norman McElhiney, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying [250] relief 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. McElhiney v. Keller; No. 1:12-cv-00037-R JC, 2013 WL 6237983 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 3, 2013). 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.

McElhiney v. Keller, 568 F. App'x 249 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

568 F. App'x 249 (McElhiney v. Keller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related