Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

94-6394 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6394 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 27, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 36 F.3d 1091 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jasper BUCHANAN, Plaintiff Appellant, v. Richard S. LINDLER, Warden, McCormick Correctional Institution; D. Anderson, Mail Employee, McCormick Correctional Institution; G. Patterson, Mail Employee, McCormick Correctional Instituti
More

36 F.3d 1091

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jasper BUCHANAN, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Richard S. LINDLER, Warden, McCormick Correctional
Institution; D. Anderson, Mail Employee, McCormick
Correctional Institution; G. Patterson, Mail Employee,
McCormick Correctional Institution; W. G. McCuen,
Physician, McCormick Correctional Institution; Betty Yokem,
Medical Director, McCormick Correctional Institution;
Members of the South Carolina Board of Corrections;
Correctional Medical Systems, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6394.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 25, 1994.
Decided Sept. 27, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenwood. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-93-576-3-8BD)

Jasper Buchanan, appellant pro se.

James Elliott McDonald, William Brockman Watkins, Burns, McDonald, Bradford, Patrick & Dean, Greenwood, SC; William Henry Davidson, II, Andrew Frederick Lindemann, Ellis, Lawhorne, Davidson, Sims, Morrison & Sojourner, P.A., Columbia, SC, for appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Buchanan v. Lindler, No. CA-93-576-3-8BD (D.S.C. Mar. 23, 1994). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

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