Williams v. Warner

Fourth Circuit

Williams v. Warner

63 F. App'x 168

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 20, 2003·No. 03-1372·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*169 PER CURIAM.

Burt Sherman Williams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Williams v. Warner, No. CA-02-149-4 (E.D.Va. Feb. 26, 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*169 PER CURIAM.

Burt Sherman Williams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Williams v. Warner, No. CA-02-149-4 (E.D.Va. Feb. 26, 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.

Williams v. Warner, 63 F. App'x 168 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

63 F. App'x 168 (Williams v. Warner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related