U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Bedell v. Greensville Correctional Center
This writing
- Type
- Opinion of the Court
- Per curiam
- Yes — no individual author
- Filed
- June 7, 2002
- Case
- Bedell v. Greensville Correctional Center
- Case status
- Decided
Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.
Opening text
The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.
PER CURIAM. Clinton Bedell appeals the district court order and judgment dismissing his complaint for failing to include an original signature as required by Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Bedell v. Greensville Correctional, No. CA-01-892-2 (E.D.Va. Mar. 12, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conclusions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED.…
Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.