Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Alexander v. Moore, 98-7037 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-7037 Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 23, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7037 JOHN DOUGLAS ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE, Director; WILLIAM D. CATOE, Deputy Director; COLIE L. RUSHTON; LEROY CARTLEDGE, Major; D. MCTAGGER, Captain; P. JONES, Lieutenant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-2598-6-20AK) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: Febru
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7037 JOHN DOUGLAS ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE, Director; WILLIAM D. CATOE, Deputy Director; COLIE L. RUSHTON; LEROY CARTLEDGE, Major; D. MCTAGGER, Captain; P. JONES, Lieutenant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-2598-6-20AK) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 23, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Douglas Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Franklin Turner, Jr., CLARKSON, FORTSON, WALSH & RHENEY, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have re- viewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Alexander v. Moore, No. CA-97-2598-6-20AK (D.S.C. June 18, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
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