Case Name: Earnest C. HALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sarah HALL; Sid Bell, Prosecuting Attorney, McDowell County, Welch, WV; Charlie Smith; Bill Sadler; Todd Houck; Kevin Wade; Tracy, Lusk, & Associates, Involved; State of West Virginia, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-09-25
Citations: 22 F. App'x 82
Docket Number: No. 01-1412
Parties: Earnest C. HALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sarah HALL; Sid Bell, Prosecuting Attorney, McDowell County, Welch, WV; Charlie Smith; Bill Sadler; Todd Houck; Kevin Wade; Tracy, Lusk, & Associates, Involved; State of West Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 22
Pages: 82–82

Head Matter:
Earnest C. HALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sarah HALL; Sid Bell, Prosecuting Attorney, McDowell County, Welch, WV; Charlie Smith; Bill Sadler; Todd Houck; Kevin Wade; Tracy, Lusk, & Associates, Involved; State of West Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-1412.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 20, 2001.
Decided Sept. 25, 2001.
Earnest C. Hale, pro se. Ancil Glenn Ramey, Steptoe & Johnson, Charleston, WV, for appellees.
Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Earnest C. Hale appeals the district Court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hale v. Hall, No. CA-01-33-5 (S.D.W.Va. Mar. 7, 2001). 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.