Smith v. Tyler

Fourth Circuit

Smith v. Tyler

455 F. App'x 302

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 23, 2011·No. No. 11-6901·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Russell Smith appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Smith v. Tyler, No. 8:09-cv-01061-PJM (D. Md. Feb. 15 & May 16, 2011). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Russell Smith appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Smith v. Tyler, No. 8:09-cv-01061-PJM (D. Md. Feb. 15 & May 16, 2011). 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. Tyler, 455 F. App'x 302 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

455 F. App'x 302 (Smith v. Tyler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related