Hairston v. Walker
This text of Hairston v. Walker (Hairston v. Walker) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 08-1005
IRENE F. HAIRSTON; PEGGY M. H. ROBINS; DELORIS A. MCKNIGHT,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
WILLIAM WALKER, Esquire; BRENT STEVENS, Esquire; CRAIG, BRAWLEY, LUPFERT & WALKER, STEVENS, L.L.P.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (1:06-cv-00102-NCT-WWD)
Submitted: May 29, 2008 Decided: June 4, 2008
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Irene F. Hairston, Peggy M. H. Robins, Deloris A. McKnight, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, for Appellants. William Watts Walker, CRAIG, BRAWLEY, LUPFERT & WALKER, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Irene F. Hairston, Peggy M. H. Robins, and Deloris A.
McKnight appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their
civil complaint and denying their motion for reconsideration, Fed.
R. Civ. P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Hairston v. Walker, No. 1:06-cv-00102-NCT-WWD
(M.D.N.C. July 19 & Oct. 29, 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hairston v. Walker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hairston-v-walker-ca4-2008.