Harrison v. Herbel

Fourth Circuit

Harrison v. Herbel

281 F. App'x 236

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 12, 2008

Docket07-7748

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 281 F. App'x 236 (Harrison v. Herbel) 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

Harrison v. Herbel, 281 F. App'x 236 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

William Henry Harrison appeals the district court’s orders: (1) dismissing this action arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Freedom of Information Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 (2000), Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and North Carolina state law; and (2) denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harrison v. Herbel, No. 5:05-ct-00550-D (E.D.N.C. July 17, 2007; filed Oct. 10, entered Oct. 11, 2007; Nov. 6, 2007; Mar. 4, 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

PER CURIAM:

William Henry Harrison appeals the district court’s orders: (1) dismissing this action arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Freedom of Information Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 (2000), Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and North Carolina state law; and (2) denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harrison v. Herbel, No. 5:05-ct-00550-D (E.D.N.C. July 17, 2007; filed Oct. 10, entered Oct. 11, 2007; Nov. 6, 2007; Mar. 4, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 F. App'x 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrison-v-herbel-ca4-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack