Filed: Aug. 30, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6503 KARL KEVIN HILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARK CUNNINGHAM; CHRISTOPHER SHRADER; JOHN CUTRIGHT; R. HIMES; K.S. MCBEE; UNNAMED DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00135-FPS-JES) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Ci
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6503 KARL KEVIN HILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARK CUNNINGHAM; CHRISTOPHER SHRADER; JOHN CUTRIGHT; R. HIMES; K.S. MCBEE; UNNAMED DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00135-FPS-JES) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Cir..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6503
KARL KEVIN HILL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MARK CUNNINGHAM; CHRISTOPHER SHRADER; JOHN CUTRIGHT; R.
HIMES; K.S. MCBEE; UNNAMED DEFENDANTS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00135-FPS-JES)
Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 30, 2010
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Karl Kevin Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Deering Mullins,
STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Karl Kevin Hill appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hill v.
Cunningham, No. 5:09-cv-00135-FPS-JES (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 19,
2010). 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