Rowl v. Smith Debnam Narron Wyche Saintsing & Myers, LLP
This text of 566 F. App'x 264 (Rowl v. Smith Debnam Narron Wyche Saintsing & Myers, LLP) 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
Affirmed by unpublished Per Curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pauline Rowl appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her federal civil rights suit. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rowl v. Smith Debnam Narron Wyche Saintsing & Myers, LLP, No. 3:07-cv-00491-RJC-DLH, 2009 WL 187575 (WD.N.C. Jan. 23, 2009 & June 4, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be[265]*265fore 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
566 F. App'x 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowl-v-smith-debnam-narron-wyche-saintsing-myers-llp-ca4-2014.