Filed: Jun. 11, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7701 VICKY HARDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST R. SUTTON, Superintendent at Pasquotank Correctional Center; MS. VANKEUREN, Medical Services at Pasquotank Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:05-ct-00491-FL) Submitted: January 31, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007 Before
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7701 VICKY HARDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST R. SUTTON, Superintendent at Pasquotank Correctional Center; MS. VANKEUREN, Medical Services at Pasquotank Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:05-ct-00491-FL) Submitted: January 31, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007 Before W..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7701
VICKY HARDY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ERNEST R. SUTTON, Superintendent at Pasquotank
Correctional Center; MS. VANKEUREN, Medical
Services at Pasquotank Correctional Center,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (5:05-ct-00491-FL)
Submitted: January 31, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vicky Hardy, Appellant Pro Se. Yvonne Bulluck Ricci, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Vicky Hardy appeals the district court’s order dismissing
Hardy’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice for failure to
exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. While the district court may have erred
in dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust under the
Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jones v. Bock, ___U.S.___,
2007
WL 135890 (U.S. Jan. 22, 2007) (No. 05-7058), we affirm the
district court’s order on the modified ground that Hardy cannot
proceed on claims based upon respondeat superior and supervisory
liability. See Shaw v. Stroud,
13 F.3d 791, 799 (4th Cir. 1994);
Wright v. Collins,
766 F.2d 841, 850 (4th Cir. 1985). 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 -