Wallace v. Lamson
This text of 588 F. App'x 283 (Wallace v. Lamson) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
In these consolidated appeals, Kelso David Wallace appeals from the district court’s orders denying relief on his civil' complaint and his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). We have reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wallace v. Lamson, No. 8:13-cv-00866-PWG, 2014 WL 956935 (D.Md. Mar. 11, 2014); Wallace v. Lamson, No. 8-14-cv-02089-PWG, 2014 WL 5812333 (D.Md. Nov. 7, 2014). We deny Wallace’s motion for appointment of counsel and 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
588 F. App'x 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-lamson-ca4-2014.