Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)

Fourth Circuit

Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)

61 F. App'x 894

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 2, 2003·No. No. 03-1031·Published

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] 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.

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] presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

Pincite

61 F. App'x 894 (Hart v. Fisher Law Group (PLCC)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.