Case Name: Thomas J. SQUIREK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE LAW OFFICES OF SESSOMS & ROGERS, P.A.; Stuart M. Sessoms, Jr., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-20
Citations: 71 F. App'x 268
Docket Number: No. 03-1746
Parties: Thomas J. SQUIREK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE LAW OFFICES OF SESSOMS & ROGERS, P.A.; Stuart M. Sessoms, Jr., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 71
Pages: 268–268

Head Matter:
Thomas J. SQUIREK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE LAW OFFICES OF SESSOMS & ROGERS, P.A.; Stuart M. Sessoms, Jr., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-1746.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 14, 2003.
Decided Aug. 20, 2003.
Thomas J. Squirek, Appellant Pro Se. E. Fitzgerald Parnell, III, Joshua Blake Durham, Poyner & Spruill, Charlotte, North Carolina; Stuart M. Sessoms, Sessoms & Rogers, P.A., Durham, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Thomas J. Squirek appeals the district court's order dismissing his complaint against the Law Offices of Sessoms & Rogers, P.A., and Stuart M. Sessoms, Jr. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Squirek v. Law Offices of Sessoms & Rogers, P.A., 2003 WL 21026580, No. CA-02—40—1 (M.D.N.C. May 5, 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.