Filed: Dec. 19, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7494 HERBERT ALONZO ROBINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUSAN GUNNELS; NURSE COFFEY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-2090-2-17AJ) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. H
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7494 HERBERT ALONZO ROBINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUSAN GUNNELS; NURSE COFFEY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-2090-2-17AJ) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. He..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7494 HERBERT ALONZO ROBINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUSAN GUNNELS; NURSE COFFEY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-2090-2-17AJ) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herbert Alonzo Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. ยง 1983 (1994) 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. Robinson v. Gunnels, No. CA-96-2090-2-17AJ (D.S.C. Sept. 4, 1996). 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. AFFIRMED 2
