Filed: Jul. 31, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1271 TODD M. JACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BILL MCCOLLUM, Attorney General for State of Florida, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (5:08-cv-00111-gec) Submitted: July 20, 2009 Decided: July 31, 2009 Before MICHAEL and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1271 TODD M. JACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BILL MCCOLLUM, Attorney General for State of Florida, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (5:08-cv-00111-gec) Submitted: July 20, 2009 Decided: July 31, 2009 Before MICHAEL and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1271 TODD M. JACK, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BILL MCCOLLUM, Attorney General for State of Florida, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (5:08-cv-00111-gec) Submitted: July 20, 2009 Decided: July 31, 2009 Before MICHAEL and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Todd M. Jack, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Todd M. Jack appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jack v. McCollum, No. 5:08-cv-00111-gec (W.D. Va. Feb. 27, 2009). 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
