Short v. North Carolina

Fourth Circuit

Short v. North Carolina

668 F. App'x 528

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 16, 2016

DocketNo. 16-1196

StatusPublished

This text of 668 F. App'x 528 (Short v. North Carolina) 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.

Bluebook

Short v. North Carolina, 668 F. App'x 528 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Todd Short appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint in which he asserted violations of federal and state law. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Short’s motions for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris and for leave to file an oversized brief, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Short v. North Carolina, No. 1:15-cv-00044-GCM-DSC, 2016 WL 715776 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 22, 2016). We deny Short’s motion to disqualify counsel and his motion for civil contempt, and we deny as moot his motion for an expedited decision on the motion for contempt. 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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Todd Short appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint in which he asserted violations of federal and state law. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Short’s motions for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris and for leave to file an oversized brief, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Short v. North Carolina, No. 1:15-cv-00044-GCM-DSC, 2016 WL 715776 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 22, 2016). We deny Short’s motion to disqualify counsel and his motion for civil contempt, and we deny as moot his motion for an expedited decision on the motion for contempt. 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 F. App'x 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/short-v-north-carolina-ca4-2016.