Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Padgett v. Moore, 99-7270 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-7270 Visitors: 23
Filed: Dec. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7270 JAMES L. PADGETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE, Director of South Carolina De- partment of Corrections; DEBORAH FORD, Direc- tor of Laboratory Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-98-2955-6-12) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7270 JAMES L. PADGETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE, Director of South Carolina De- partment of Corrections; DEBORAH FORD, Direc- tor of Laboratory Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-98-2955-6-12) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James L. Padgett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Foster McLeod, HARRIS & MCLEOD, Cheraw, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James L. Padgett, Jr., appeals the district court’s order de- nying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no re- versible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Padgett v. Moore, No. CA-98-2955-6-12 (D.S.C. Aug. 31, 1999). 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 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer