Husketh v. Beck

Fourth Circuit

Husketh v. Beck

55 F. App'x 158

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 24, 2003

Docket02-7552

StatusUnpublished

This text of 55 F. App'x 158 (Husketh v. Beck) 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

Husketh v. Beck, 55 F. App'x 158 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Douglas Lee Husketh appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his motion to void that judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Husketh v. Beck, No. CA-02-465-5-H (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 26, 2002, entered Aug. 27, 2002; Sept. 17, 2002). 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

PER CURIAM.

Douglas Lee Husketh appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his motion to void that judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Husketh v. Beck, No. CA-02-465-5-H (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 26, 2002, entered Aug. 27, 2002; Sept. 17, 2002). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 F. App'x 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/husketh-v-beck-ca4-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack