Hardy v. Bennett
This text of Hardy v. Bennett (Hardy v. Bennett) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 08-8432
LESTER HARDY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BOYD BENNETT; DENNIS ROWLAND,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:08-ct-03044-H)
Submitted: March 12, 2009 Decided: March 17, 2009
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lester Hardy, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Lester Hardy appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Hardy v. Bennett, No. 5:08-ct-03044-H (E.D.N.C. Nov. 10,
2008). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hardy v. Bennett, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hardy-v-bennett-ca4-2009.