Nickens v. Pearson

Fourth Circuit

Nickens v. Pearson

46 F. App'x 730

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 30, 2002

Docket02-7054

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 46 F. App'x 730 (Nickens v. Pearson) 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

Nickens v. Pearson, 46 F. App'x 730 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Theodore M. Nickens appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Nickens v. Pearson, No. CA-00-805-3 (E.D. Va. June 21, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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.

Theodore M. Nickens appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Nickens v. Pearson, No. CA-00-805-3 (E.D. Va. June 21, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 F. App'x 730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nickens-v-pearson-ca4-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack