Filed: Oct. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6609 MICHAEL D. JAMES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT LEWIS, Assistant Warden of Security; NFN MURSIER, Major of Security; OFFICER GOBLE, #051041, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (9:15-cv-00625-TLW) Submitted: October 11, 2016 Decided: October 19, 2016 Before GREGORY, Chief J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6609 MICHAEL D. JAMES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT LEWIS, Assistant Warden of Security; NFN MURSIER, Major of Security; OFFICER GOBLE, #051041, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (9:15-cv-00625-TLW) Submitted: October 11, 2016 Decided: October 19, 2016 Before GREGORY, Chief Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6609
MICHAEL D. JAMES,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT LEWIS, Assistant Warden of
Security; NFN MURSIER, Major of Security; OFFICER GOBLE,
#051041,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (9:15-cv-00625-TLW)
Submitted: October 11, 2016 Decided: October 19, 2016
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael D. James, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Pruitt,
MCDONALD, PATRICK, POSTON, HEMPHILL & ROPER, LLC, Greenwood,
South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael D. James appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting
summary judgment to defendants and dismissing 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. James v. Cartledge, No.
9:15-cv-00625-TLW (D.S.C. Apr. 12, 2016). We deny James’ motion
for appointment of counsel and 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