History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rogers v. Carr
16-4838
4th Cir.
Jun 6, 1996
Check Treatment

*1 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nevell Rogers, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying re- lief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Rogers v. Carr, No. CA-95-3829-3-OBC (D.S.C. Jan. 8, 1996). 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

2

Case Details

Case Name: Rogers v. Carr
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Jun 6, 1996
Docket Number: 16-4838
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.