Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)

Fourth Circuit

Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)

61 F. App'x 894

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 2, 2003

DocketNo. 03-1031

StatusPublished

This text of 61 F. App'x 894 (Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)) 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

Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC), 61 F. App'x 894 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joseph and Mary Hart appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their complaint sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Appellants’ motion for the appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately [895]*895presented 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.

Joseph and Mary Hart appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their complaint sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Appellants’ motion for the appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately [895]*895presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 F. App'x 894, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hart-v-fisher-law-group-plcc-ca4-2003.