Richardson v. Eagleton

Fourth Circuit

Richardson v. Eagleton

146 F. App'x 688

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Richardson v. Eagleton. Read the opinion of the Court — 100 F. App'x 951 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 26, 2005·No. 05-6611·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Dale Richardson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Richardson v. Eagleton, No. CA-01-2553-1 (D.S.C. Mar. 17, 2005). 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:

Curtis Dale Richardson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Richardson v. Eagleton, No. CA-01-2553-1 (D.S.C. Mar. 17, 2005). 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

Richardson v. Eagleton, 146 F. App'x 688 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

146 F. App'x 688 (Richardson v. Eagleton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related