Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jones v. Ward, 00-6598 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6598 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jul. 25, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6598 ERNEST LEE JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT WARD, Warden of Evans Prison; PATRICIA POWELL, Grievance Clerk of Evans Prison; SCOTT JOHNSON, Grievance Clerk of Evans Prison, all sued in their individual and official capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-99-1248-4-19BF) Submitted: Jul
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6598 ERNEST LEE JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT WARD, Warden of Evans Prison; PATRICIA POWELL, Grievance Clerk of Evans Prison; SCOTT JOHNSON, Grievance Clerk of Evans Prison, all sued in their individual and official capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-99-1248-4-19BF) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest Lee Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Pruitt, BURNS, MCDONALD, BRADFORD, PATRICK & TINSLEY, Greenwood, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ernest Lee Jones appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on Jones’ 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recom- mendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jones v. Ward, No. CA-99- 1248-4-19BF (D.S.C. Mar. 31, 2000). 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