Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

95-6469 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6469 Visitors: 30
Filed: Jul. 13, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 60 F.3d 827 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Kenneth Lane WILKES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Parker EVATT, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections; Tony Strawhorn, Chief, Community Service Branch, South Carolina Department of Corrections; Douglas P. Taylor, W
More

60 F.3d 827
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Kenneth Lane WILKES, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Parker EVATT, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of
Corrections; Tony Strawhorn, Chief, Community Service
Branch, South Carolina Department of Corrections; Douglas
P. Taylor, Warden, Lieber Correctional Institution,
Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6469.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 22, 1995.
Decided: July 13, 1995.

Kenneth Lane Wilkes, appellant pro se. Larry Cleveland Batson, Robert Eric Petersen, Barbara Murcier Bowens, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Columbia, SC, for appellees.

Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed 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. Wilkes v. Evatt, No. CA-94-182-3-17BC (D.S.C. Feb. 23, 1995). 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