Hatchett v. Potter
This text of Hatchett v. Potter (Hatchett v. Potter) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 02-1046
DOROTHY D. HATCHETT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JOHN POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-00-461)
Submitted: December 3, 2002 Decided: December 18, 2002
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dorothy D. Hatchett, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Jean Prillaman, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Stephan James Boardman, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Dorothy D. Hatchett appeals the district court’s order
granting Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative,
Motion for Summary Judgment. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Hatchett v. Potter, No. CA-00-461 (E.D. Va.
Dec. 7, 2001). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hatchett v. Potter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatchett-v-potter-ca4-2002.