Thomas v. Ulep

467 F. App'x 201
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 27, 2012
DocketNo. 11-7319
StatusPublished

This text of 467 F. App'x 201 (Thomas v. Ulep) 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
Thomas v. Ulep, 467 F. App'x 201 (4th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Earl Thomas appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying Thomas’ motion to amend his complaint to add new defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Thomas v. Ulep, No. 1:10-cv-00245-CMH-JFA, 2011 WL 864311 (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 9 & entered Mar. 10, 2011); 2011 WL 4102219 (filed Sept. 13 & entered Sept. 14, 2011). Further, we deny Thomas’ motion to compel the production of documents. 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)
467 F. App'x 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-ulep-ca4-2012.