Sanford v. Kolongo

Fourth Circuit

Sanford v. Kolongo

514 F. App'x 342

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 15, 2013·No. No. 12-7774·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Lee Sanford 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 affirm for the rea[343] sons stated by the district court. See Sanford v. Cherry, No. 1:11-cv-00348-LMB-JFA (E.D.Va. Sept. 20, 2012). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Lee Sanford 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 affirm for the rea[343] sons stated by the district court. See Sanford v. Cherry, No. 1:11-cv-00348-LMB-JFA (E.D.Va. Sept. 20, 2012). 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.

Sanford v. Kolongo, 514 F. App'x 342 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

514 F. App'x 342 (Sanford v. Kolongo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related