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)
03-7899•Joe David Barnard v. Billy Joe Durham
03-7899Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 26, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7899
JOE DAVID BARNARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BILLY JOE DURHAM,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-03-3321-6-20BI)
Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joe David Barnard, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Joe David Barnard appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and
the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Barnard v. Durham, No. CA-03-3321-6-20BI (D.S.C. Nov. 24, 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.