Robinson v. Haynes

Fourth Circuit

Robinson v. Haynes

390 F. App'x 272

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 9, 2010·No. No. 10-6616·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Earl Robinson appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for injunctive relief in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Robinson v. Haynes, No. 5:09-ct-03005-FL (E.D.N.C. Apr. 16, 2010). We dispense with oral argument'because the facts and [273]*273legal 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Earl Robinson appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for injunctive relief in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Robinson v. Haynes, No. 5:09-ct-03005-FL (E.D.N.C. Apr. 16, 2010). We dispense with oral argument'because the facts and [273]*273legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Robinson v. Haynes, 390 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

390 F. App'x 272 (Robinson v. Haynes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related