Narrative Opinion Summary
Marketta Denise Humes-Jones's appeal of the district court's order denying her relief on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint has been affirmed by a per curiam opinion. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, thus upholding the district court's decision for the reasons outlined in the case Humes-Jones v. Jamalden, No. 1:10-cv-228-GBL-JFA, 2011 WL 570268 (E.D.Va. Feb. 14, 2011). Oral argument was deemed unnecessary as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials. The ruling is affirmed. Unpublished opinions in this circuit do not serve as binding precedent.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Complaintssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirms the district court's order denying relief on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint after finding no reversible error in the case record.
Reasoning: The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, thus upholding the district court's decision for the reasons outlined in the case Humes-Jones v. Jamalden, No. 1:10-cv-228-GBL-JFA, 2011 WL 570268 (E.D.Va. Feb. 14, 2011).
Oral Argument in Appellate Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Oral argument was considered unnecessary by the appellate court as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the submitted materials.
Reasoning: Oral argument was deemed unnecessary as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials.
Precedential Value of Unpublished Opinionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision in this case, as an unpublished opinion, does not serve as binding precedent within the circuit.
Reasoning: Unpublished opinions in this circuit do not serve as binding precedent.