Filed: Nov. 19, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6683 EDMUND B. GREGORIE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EUGENE GOINS; STEVE LOFTIS, Sheriff of Greenville County, South Carolina, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:05-cv-00822-HFF) Submitted: October 19, 2007 Decided: November 19, 2007 Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6683 EDMUND B. GREGORIE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EUGENE GOINS; STEVE LOFTIS, Sheriff of Greenville County, South Carolina, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:05-cv-00822-HFF) Submitted: October 19, 2007 Decided: November 19, 2007 Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit J..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6683 EDMUND B. GREGORIE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EUGENE GOINS; STEVE LOFTIS, Sheriff of Greenville County, South Carolina, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:05-cv-00822-HFF) Submitted: October 19, 2007 Decided: November 19, 2007 Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adam Fisher, Jr., THE FISHER LAW FIRM, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Russell W. Harter, Jr., CHAPMAN, HARTER & GROVES, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Edmund B. Gregorie appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Gregorie v. Goins, No. 6:05-cv-00822-HFF (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 2007). 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 -
