You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Coleman v. Winthrop Police Department

Citation: 550 F. App'x 167Docket: No. 13-7281

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; January 15, 2014; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

William T. Coleman appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint by the district court, which accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The appellate court reviewed the case and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons articulated in its ruling. The case citation is Coleman v. Winthrop Police Dep’t, No. 0:12-cv-01915-JFA, 2013 WL 3929787 (D.S.C. July 29, 2013). The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary, as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently addressed in the submitted materials. The decision was affirmed.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Review Standard

Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible error, thus affirming the decision.

Reasoning: The appellate court reviewed the case and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons articulated in its ruling.

Dismissal of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Complaint

Application: The district court dismissed William T. Coleman's complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, following the magistrate judge's recommendation, due to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Reasoning: William T. Coleman appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint by the district court, which accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Necessity of Oral Argument in Appellate Proceedings

Application: The appellate court deemed oral argument unnecessary, concluding that the case facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the written materials submitted.

Reasoning: The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary, as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently addressed in the submitted materials.