Sloan v. Kimbriel

63 F. App'x 174
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 21, 2003
DocketNo. 02-7366
StatusPublished

This text of 63 F. App'x 174 (Sloan v. Kimbriel) 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
Sloan v. Kimbriel, 63 F. App'x 174 (4th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Michael W. Sloan appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying relief on his mandamus petition, granting judgment to the Defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint, and denying his motion for reconsideration 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. See Sloan v. United States, No. CA-01-347-3 (E.D. Va. Mar. 5, 2002; July 10, 2002; Aug. 14, 2002). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 F. App'x 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sloan-v-kimbriel-ca4-2003.