Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Hatcher v. Harkleroad, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    Eddie Hatcher filed a 42 USC 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Hatcher appealed. The appeals court reviewed the case and found no errors in the district court's ruling. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief to Hatcher based on the reasoning provided by the lower court. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-05-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-6411

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Eddie Hatcher filed a 42 USC 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Hatcher appealed. The appeals court reviewed the case and found no errors in the district court's ruling. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief to Hatcher based on the reasoning provided by the lower court. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Hatcher v. Harkleroad, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Eddie Hatcher filed a 42 USC 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Hatcher appealed. The appeals court reviewed the case and found no errors in the district court's ruling. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief to Hatcher based on the reasoning provided by the lower court. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were clearly presented in the case materials.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 02-6411

    EDDIE HATCHER,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    SID HARKLEROAD, Superintendent at Marion
    Correctional
    Institution;
    BOYD
    BENNETT,
    Director of Prisons at NC DOC; THEODIS BECK,
    Secretary of NC DOC,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-02-25-1-1-MU)

    Submitted:

    May 16, 2002

    Decided:

    May 28, 2002

    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Eddie Hatcher, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Eddie Hatcher appeals the district courts order denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint.

    We

    have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find
    no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

    the district court.

    Hatcher v. Harkleroad, No. CA-02-25-1-1-MU

    (W.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2002).

    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

    You might also like