Bolls v. Street

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 17, 2011
Docket10-2361
StatusUnpublished

This text of Bolls v. Street (Bolls v. Street) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bolls v. Street, (4th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-2361

JONATHAN BOLLS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

W. SCOTT STREET, III, Secretary of the Virginia Board of Examiners,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:10-cv-00550-REP)

Submitted: March 15, 2011 Decided: March 17, 2011

Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Bolls, Appellant Pro Se. Catherine Crooks Hill, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Bolls appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing Bolls’ complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denying

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Bolls v. Street, No. 3:10-cv-00550-REP

(E.D. Va. Nov. 5 & Dec. 16, 2010). We 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bolls v. Street, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bolls-v-street-ca4-2011.