Harrison v. Sprinkle

Fourth Circuit

Harrison v. Sprinkle

385 F. App'x 310

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 25, 2010·No. No. 10-6253·Published

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Niles Harrison appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Harrison v. Major Sprinkle, No. 2:10-cv-00046-RBS-FBS (E.D.Va. Feb. 4, 2010). We deny Harrison’s informal complaint motion. 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.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Niles Harrison appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Harrison v. Major Sprinkle, No. 2:10-cv-00046-RBS-FBS (E.D.Va. Feb. 4, 2010). We deny Harrison’s informal complaint motion. 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.

DISMISSED.

Harrison v. Sprinkle, 385 F. App'x 310 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

385 F. App'x 310 (Harrison v. Sprinkle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related