Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Allen v. Coker College, 98-2818 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-2818 Visitors: 15
Filed: Mar. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2818 DALLICE M. ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COKER COLLEGE; HAL LEWIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-2480-4-10BD) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 30, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2818 DALLICE M. ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COKER COLLEGE; HAL LEWIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-2480-4-10BD) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 30, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dallice M. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Augustus Dunlap, PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dallice M. Allen appeals from the district court’s order deny- ing relief in her civil action in which she alleged that the Defendants, in retaliation for her previous lawsuit against Coker College, sent a financial aid transcript containing a defamatory statement to the University of South Carolina. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magis- trate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Allen v. Coker College, No. CA-96-2480-4-10BD (D.S.C. Dec. 4, 1998). 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
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