Filed: Sep. 26, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1763 DAWN FIGMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KYLE COURTNALL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-01-45-3) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dawn Figman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1763 DAWN FIGMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KYLE COURTNALL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-01-45-3) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dawn Figman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1763 DAWN FIGMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KYLE COURTNALL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-01-45-3) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dawn Figman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dawn Figman appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1985 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Figman v. Courtnall, No. CA-01-45-3 (W.D. Va. Apr. 30, 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 2
