Hoover v. Schatzman

Fourth Circuit

Hoover v. Schatzman

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 18, 2005

Docket05-6120

StatusUnpublished

This text of Hoover v. Schatzman (Hoover v. Schatzman) 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

Hoover v. Schatzman, (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6120

ANTHONY LEON HOOVER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WILLIAM T. SCHATZMAN, Head Sheriff; WAYNE JAMES, Mayor; JANIET SIPE, Sgt.; KANJENNER WILKS, Head Nurse,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-863)

Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 18, 2005

Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Leon Hoover, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Anthony Leon Hoover seeks to appeal the district court’s

order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing

his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) without prejudice. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the

district court. See Hoover v. Schatzman, No. CA-04-863 (M.D.N.C.

Jan. 4, 2005). 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

- 2 -

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