Filed: Jul. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6692 RODERICK ENGLISH, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DOCTOR BEVERLY A. WOOD; DONIKIAS GRAY; COUNSELORS MADDOX; WILLIAM R. BYARS, JR.; DOCTOR NOCHO PEREZ; ASHLEY SHARMANE WASHINGTON; DOCTOR FERLUATO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (1:13-cv-02677-JFA) Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014 Before F
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6692 RODERICK ENGLISH, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DOCTOR BEVERLY A. WOOD; DONIKIAS GRAY; COUNSELORS MADDOX; WILLIAM R. BYARS, JR.; DOCTOR NOCHO PEREZ; ASHLEY SHARMANE WASHINGTON; DOCTOR FERLUATO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (1:13-cv-02677-JFA) Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014 Before FL..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6692
RODERICK ENGLISH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DOCTOR BEVERLY A. WOOD; DONIKIAS GRAY; COUNSELORS MADDOX;
WILLIAM R. BYARS, JR.; DOCTOR NOCHO PEREZ; ASHLEY SHARMANE
WASHINGTON; DOCTOR FERLUATO,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (1:13-cv-02677-JFA)
Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014
Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roderick Jerome English, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Roderick Jerome English appeals the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. English v. Wood, No. 1:13-cv-02677-JFA (D.S.C. Apr. 1,
2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2