Odom v. South Carolina

Fourth Circuit

Odom v. South Carolina

676 F. App'x 206

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 16, 2017·No. No. 16-2121·Published

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this eircpit.

PER CURIAM:

Christopher A. Odom appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, dismissing Odom’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2012), and imposing a pre-filing injunction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in formal pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Odom v. South Carolina, No. 5:16-cv-02674-RMG (D.S.C. [207] Sept. 15, 2016). 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.

DISMISSED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this eircpit.

PER CURIAM:

Christopher A. Odom appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, dismissing Odom’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2012), and imposing a pre-filing injunction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in formal pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Odom v. South Carolina, No. 5:16-cv-02674-RMG (D.S.C. [207] Sept. 15, 2016). 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.

DISMISSED

Odom v. South Carolina, 676 F. App'x 206 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

676 F. App'x 206 (Odom v. South Carolina) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related