Case ID: f-appx_109/html/0540-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Barry HALL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Brett EDMONDS; D.A. Braxton, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 04-6805.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 9, 2004.
    Decided Sept. 15, 2004.
    Barry Hall, Appellant pro se.
    
      Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Barry Hall appeals the district court’s orders denying rehef on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and his subsequent motions to amend his complaint, to alter judgment, and for rehef from judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hall v. Edmonds, No. CA-04-136 (W.D.Va. Mar. 24 and Apr. 16, 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