Muhammad v. Ulep

Fourth Circuit

Muhammad v. Ulep

581 F. App'x 315

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 22, 2014

DocketNo. 14-6612

StatusPublished

This text of 581 F. App'x 315 (Muhammad v. Ulep) 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

Muhammad v. Ulep, 581 F. App'x 315 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Malcolm Muhammad appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Muhammad v. Ulep, No. 1:14-cv-00055-LO-IDD (E.D.Va. filed Apr. 10, 2014; entered Apr. 11, 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

PER CURIAM:

Malcolm Muhammad appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Muhammad v. Ulep, No. 1:14-cv-00055-LO-IDD (E.D.Va. filed Apr. 10, 2014; entered Apr. 11, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 F. App'x 315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muhammad-v-ulep-ca4-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack