Case Name: Edward Junior CLARK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. QUEEN CITY RECOVERY; Carlyle Britt, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-25
Citations: 21 F. App'x 162
Docket Number: No. 01-1777
Parties: Edward Junior CLARK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. QUEEN CITY RECOVERY; Carlyle Britt, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 21
Pages: 162–163

Head Matter:
Edward Junior CLARK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. QUEEN CITY RECOVERY; Carlyle Britt, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-1777.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 18, 2001.
Decided Oct. 25, 2001.
Edward Junior Clark, pro se.
Michael David Bland, Weaver, Bennett & Bland, P.A., Matthews, NC, for appellees.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Edward Junior Clark appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 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. Clark v. Queen City Recovery, No. CA-00-372-3MU (W.D.N.C. May 9 & 10, 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.