Wagner v. Stouffer

Fourth Circuit

Wagner v. Stouffer

467 F. App'x 230

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 2012

DocketNo. 11-7664

StatusPublished

This text of 467 F. App'x 230 (Wagner v. Stouffer) 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

Wagner v. Stouffer, 467 F. App'x 230 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Michael Joseph Wagner, Sr. appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to re-open the appeal period. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wagner v. Stouffer, No. 8:10-cv-01944-AW (D.Md. Dec. 1, 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

PER CURIAM:

Michael Joseph Wagner, Sr. appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to re-open the appeal period. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wagner v. Stouffer, No. 8:10-cv-01944-AW (D.Md. Dec. 1, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

467 F. App'x 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wagner-v-stouffer-ca4-2012.