Case Name: Barry HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. MOORE; G. Meade; Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-13
Citations: 55 F. App'x 708
Docket Number: No. 02-7870
Parties: Barry HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. MOORE; G. Meade; Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 708–709

Head Matter:
Barry HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. MOORE; G. Meade; Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-7870.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 6, 2003.
Decided Feb. 13, 2003.
Barry Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Jim Harold Guynn, Jr., Guynn & Memmer, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia; Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Barry Hall appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint, the reconsideration of that order, and his motion to amend his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hall v. Moore, No. CA-02-1105-7 (W.D.Va. Nov. 22, 2002). 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.