Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

John T. Vinson v. Warden Fowler, Correctional Officer O'neal, John Doe, Two Officers Named, 91-7084 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-7084 Visitors: 31
Filed: Aug. 01, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 940 F.2d 654 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. John T. VINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden FOWLER, Correctional Officer O'Neal, John Doe, Two Officers Named, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-7084. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted
More

940 F.2d 654
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
John T. VINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Warden FOWLER, Correctional Officer O'Neal, John Doe, Two
Officers Named, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 91-7084.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 19, 1991.
Decided Aug. 1, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Falcon B. Hawkins, Chief District Judge. (CA-90-1581-3)

John T. Vinson, appellant pro se.

E. Crosby Lewis, Belser, Lewis, Bruce & Rogers, P.A., Columbia, S.C., for appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before K.K. HALL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

John T. Vinson appeals from the district court's order granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's wrongful death action. 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. Vinson v. Fowler, CA-90-1581-3 (D.S.C. Apr. 29, 1991). 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