Perkins v. Dewberry
This text of 139 F. App'x 599 (Perkins v. Dewberry) 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
Herschel Julius Perkins appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error because, even accepting Perkins’ version of the disputed events, his injuries were de minimis. While the district court did not address Perkins’ mental anguish claim, this claim is meritless because de minimis physical injuries cannot support a claim for mental or emotional injury. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
139 F. App'x 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perkins-v-dewberry-ca4-2005.