Filed: Aug. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6659 KENNETH C. HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JON P. GALLEY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 663-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth C. Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6659 KENNETH C. HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JON P. GALLEY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 663-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth C. Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6659 KENNETH C. HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JON P. GALLEY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 663-L) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth C. Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kenneth C. Hall, a state of Maryland inmate, appeals the dis- trict court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Hall v. Galley, No. CA-01-663-L (D. Md. Apr. 4, 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. DISMISSED 2
