Simpson v. Fahey

Fourth Circuit

Simpson v. Fahey

264 F. App'x 347

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 19, 2008·No. No. 07-6864·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John D. Simpson appeals the district coux-t’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and his motions filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Simpson v. Fahey, No. 3:04-cv-00611-REP (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 28, 2006 & entered Mar. 29, 2006; Mar. 27, 2007; Apr. 27, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 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

PER CURIAM:

John D. Simpson appeals the district coux-t’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and his motions filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Simpson v. Fahey, No. 3:04-cv-00611-REP (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 28, 2006 & entered Mar. 29, 2006; Mar. 27, 2007; Apr. 27, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Simpson v. Fahey, 264 F. App'x 347 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

264 F. App'x 347 (Simpson v. Fahey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related