Case Name: Kenneth H. NEWKIRK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William SHAW, Judge/Try Cases; Kevin P. Sha, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend Accusers; Carter Phillips, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-11-21
Citations: 585 F. App'x 235
Docket Number: No. 14-7260
Parties: Kenneth H. NEWKIRK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William SHAW, Judge/Try Cases; Kevin P. Sha, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend Accusers; Carter Phillips, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 235–236

Head Matter:
Kenneth H. NEWKIRK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William SHAW, Judge/Try Cases; Kevin P. Sha, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend Accusers; Carter Phillips, Lawyer/Suppose to Defend, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-7260.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 18, 2014.
Decided: Nov. 21, 2014.
Kenneth H. Newkirk, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth H. Newkirk appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Newkirk v. Shaw, No. 3:14-cv-00426-HEH-MHL, 2014 WL 4161991 (E.D.Va. Aug. 19, 2014). 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.