History
  • No items yet
midpage
Momolu Sirleaf, Jr. v. Eddie Pearson
697 F. App'x 221
| 4th Cir. | 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jessica Leigh Berdichevsky, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sirleaf v. Pearson , No. 3:15-cv-00301-MHL- RCY (E.D. Va. Feb. 16, 2017). We 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

2

Case Details

Case Name: Momolu Sirleaf, Jr. v. Eddie Pearson
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Sep 20, 2017
Citation: 697 F. App'x 221
Docket Number: 17-6273
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.