Stone v. Scott

Fourth Circuit

Stone v. Scott

575 F. App'x 193

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 19, 2014

DocketNo. 14-1170

StatusPublished

This text of 575 F. App'x 193 (Stone v. Scott) 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

Stone v. Scott, 575 F. App'x 193 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Steve Cary Stone appeals the district court’s order dismissing this action for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stone v. Scott, No. 1:14-cv-00027-MRDLH, 2014 WL 508257 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2014). 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

PER CURIAM:

Steve Cary Stone appeals the district court’s order dismissing this action for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stone v. Scott, No. 1:14-cv-00027-MRDLH, 2014 WL 508257 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2014). 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)

575 F. App'x 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stone-v-scott-ca4-2014.