History
  • No items yet
midpage
Thomas Littek v. Harold Clarke
16-6703
| 4th Cir. | Oct 12, 2016
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Anthony Littek, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Haeberle Cahill, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richard Carson *2 Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *3 PER CURIAM:

Thomas Anthony Littek appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his motion for a preliminary injunction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Littek v. Clarke, No. 7:16-cv-00072-JLK-PMS (W.D. Va. May 9, 2016). 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

Case Details

Case Name: Thomas Littek v. Harold Clarke
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Oct 12, 2016
Docket Number: 16-6703
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.