The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
03-7268•Kenneth A. Hinton v. WILLIE SCOTT, Warden
03-7268Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 8, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7268
KENNETH A. HINTON; JOHN CUNNINGHAM,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
WILLIE SCOTT, Warden; WACKENHUT CORRECTIONAL
CORPORATION; PHILIP MORRIS USA, INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (CA-02-944-5-F)
Submitted: September 20, 2004 Decided: October 8, 2004
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth A. Hinton, John Cunningham, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth A. Hinton and John Cunningham appeal the district
court’s orders dismissing without prejudice their 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2000) complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and
a subsequent order denying their Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 motion for
reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Hinton v. Scott, No. CA-02-944-5-F
(E.D.N.C. filed July 17, 2003 & entered July 18, 2003; filed Aug.
6, 2003 & entered Aug. 11, 2003). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.