Filed: Jul. 23, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1403 DARRELL WAYNE BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KEVIN MICHAEL COMSTOCK, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00206-AWA-DEM) Submitted: July 21, 2020 Decided: July 23, 2020 Before AGEE, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell Wayne Brown, Appellant
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1403 DARRELL WAYNE BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KEVIN MICHAEL COMSTOCK, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00206-AWA-DEM) Submitted: July 21, 2020 Decided: July 23, 2020 Before AGEE, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell Wayne Brown, Appellant P..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1403 DARRELL WAYNE BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KEVIN MICHAEL COMSTOCK, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00206-AWA-DEM) Submitted: July 21, 2020 Decided: July 23, 2020 Before AGEE, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell Wayne Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Garry Daniel Hartlieb, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Darrell Wayne Brown appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Brown v. Comstock, No. 2:19-cv-00206-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. Mar. 11, 2020). 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
