Belk v. Dickerhoff
Opinion
Ronnie M. Belk appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Belk v. Dickerhoff, No. 5:06-ct-03071-H (E.D.N.C. Oct. 19, 2006; Aug. 14, 2007). We grant Belk’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
274 F. App'x 239 (Belk v. Dickerhoff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.