Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Hurt v. Department of Corrections, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Tyrone Hurt on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against state correctional departments. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It denied Hurt's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented. The Court affirmed the district court's ruling denying relief to Hurt.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-10-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7500

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Tyrone Hurt on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against state correctional departments. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It denied Hurt's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented. The Court affirmed the district court's ruling denying relief to Hurt.

    Copyright:

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

    Hurt v. Department of Corrections, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Tyrone Hurt on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against state correctional departments. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It denied Hurt's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented. The Court affirmed the district court's ruling denying relief to Hurt.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-7500

    TYRONE HURT,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND; ALL
    DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OF THE FORTY NINE STATES OF THE
    USA,
    Defendants Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:09cv-01248-RWT)

    Submitted:

    September 28, 2009

    Decided:

    October 14, 2009

    Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Tyrone Hurt, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Tyrone Hurt appeals the district courts order denying
    relief

    on

    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2006)

    complaint.

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We

    Accordingly,

    we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.


    Dept

    of

    Corrections,

    No.

    8:09-cv-01248-RWT

    June 2, 2009, entered June 3, 2009).

    have

    (D.

    Hurt v.

    Md.

    filed

    We deny the motion for

    appointment of counsel and 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

    You might also like