Smith v. Miro

Fourth Circuit

Smith v. Miro

30 F. App'x 169

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 4, 2002·No. 01-2306·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth L. Smith, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting, in part, the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Smith v. Miro, No. CA-00-3231-1-20AK (D.S.C. *170 filed Oct. 10, 2001 & entered Oct. 11, 2001). 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.

Kenneth L. Smith, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting, in part, the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Smith v. Miro, No. CA-00-3231-1-20AK (D.S.C. *170 filed Oct. 10, 2001 & entered Oct. 11, 2001). 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.

Smith v. Miro, 30 F. App'x 169 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

30 F. App'x 169 (Smith v. Miro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related