Rivers v. Hodge

Fourth Circuit

Rivers v. Hodge

539 F. App'x 306

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 26, 2013·No. No. 13-6591·Published

Opinion

[307] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Herman F. Rivers, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Rivers’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rivers v. Hodge, No. 1:11-cv-00644-CMH-TRJ, 2013 WL 989957 (E.D.Va. filed Mar. 12, 2013, and entered Mar. 13, 2013). 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

[307] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Herman F. Rivers, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Rivers’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rivers v. Hodge, No. 1:11-cv-00644-CMH-TRJ, 2013 WL 989957 (E.D.Va. filed Mar. 12, 2013, and entered Mar. 13, 2013). 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.

Rivers v. Hodge, 539 F. App'x 306 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

539 F. App'x 306 (Rivers v. Hodge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related