Thurston v. Beskins

Fourth Circuit

Thurston v. Beskins

96 F. App'x 877

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 10, 2004

DocketNo. 04-1006

StatusPublished

This text of 96 F. App'x 877 (Thurston v. Beskins) 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

Thurston v. Beskins, 96 F. App'x 877 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Leroy M. Thurston, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Thurston’s motion for counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Thurston v. Beskins, No. CA-03-61 (W.D.Va. Nov. 24, 2003). 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.

Leroy M. Thurston, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Thurston’s motion for counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Thurston v. Beskins, No. CA-03-61 (W.D.Va. Nov. 24, 2003). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 F. App'x 877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thurston-v-beskins-ca4-2004.