The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-7309•Preston T. Jenkins v. Stephen O. Simpson
05-7309Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 3, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7309
PRESTON T. JENKINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
STEPHEN O. SIMPSON; PAUL A. LOCONTI,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CA-05-694-JCC)
Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: January 3, 2006
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Preston T. Jenkins, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Francuzenko,
O’CONNELL, O’CONNELL & SARSFIELD, Rockville, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Preston T. Jenkins appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying
reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning
of the district court. See Jenkins v. Simpson, No. CA-05-694-JCC
(E.D. Va. June 22 and July 20, 2005). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.