Hoskin v. Fahey
This text of Hoskin v. Fahey (Hoskin v. Fahey) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 04-7144
DANNY HOSKIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
HELEN F. FAHEY; DAVID N. HARKER; CAROL ANN SIEVERS; HERBERT COULTON; MICHAEL M. HAWES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-192)
Submitted: October 7, 2004 Decided: October 15, 2004
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Danny Hoskin, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Danny Hoskin appeals the district court’s orders
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his
motion to alter or amend judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Hoskin v. Fahey, No. CA-04-192 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 7,
2004 & entered Apr. 12, 2004; filed June 22, 2004 & entered
June 24, 2004). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hoskin v. Fahey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoskin-v-fahey-ca4-2004.