Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    Hoskin v. Fahey, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Danny Hoskin under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had dismissed Hoskin's complaint and denied his motion to alter or amend the judgment. The appellate court affirms the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispenses with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues are adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Hoskin v. Fahey, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Danny Hoskin under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had dismissed Hoskin's complaint and denied his motion to alter or amend the judgment. The appellate court affirms the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispenses with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues are adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-10-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7144

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Danny Hoskin under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had dismissed Hoskin's complaint and denied his motion to alter or amend the judgment. The appellate court affirms the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispenses with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues are adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    14 views2 pages

    Hoskin v. Fahey, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Danny Hoskin under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had dismissed Hoskin's complaint and denied his motion to alter or amend the judgment. The appellate court affirms the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispenses with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues are adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-7144

    DANNY HOSKIN,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    HELEN F. FAHEY; DAVID N. HARKER; CAROL ANN
    SIEVERS; HERBERT COULTON; MICHAEL M. HAWES,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Claude M. Hilton, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-04-192)

    Submitted:

    October 7, 2004

    Decided:

    October 15, 2004

    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Danny Hoskin, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Danny

    Hoskin

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    orders

    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his


    motion to alter or amend judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    See Hoskin v. Fahey, No. CA-04-192 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 7,

    2004 & entered Apr. 12, 2004; filed June 22, 2004 & entered
    June 24, 2004).

    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 -

    You might also like