Patterson v. Med
This text of 669 F. App'x 142 (Patterson v. Med) 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.
Opinion
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Charles Dante Patterson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Patterson’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Patterson v. Con Med, No. 1:15-cv-03303-JFM, 2016 WL 1718226 (D. Md. Apr. 28, 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.
AFFIRMED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
669 F. App'x 142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-med-ca4-2016.