Corrigan v. Howard
This text of Corrigan v. Howard (Corrigan v. Howard) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6660
MARK CORRIGAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MALCOLM J. HOWARD; THOMAS P. SWAIN; ANNE HAYES; DAVID W. DANIEL; KEN MACKENZIE, MacKenzie, Incorporated,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:07-CT-3023-BO)
Submitted: July 24, 2007 Decided: July 31, 2007
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Mark Corrigan appeals the district court’s order
dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000) his complaint
filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau
of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Corrigan v. Howard, No. 5:07-CT-
3023-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 10, 2007). 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
- 2 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Corrigan v. Howard, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corrigan-v-howard-ca4-2007.