Filed: May 18, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1314 EPHRAIN RELIFORD, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DALE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES; CHRISSIE N. BOYD; DALE COUNTY, Alabama, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-3625-3-17BC) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1314 EPHRAIN RELIFORD, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DALE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES; CHRISSIE N. BOYD; DALE COUNTY, Alabama, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-3625-3-17BC) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior C..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1314
EPHRAIN RELIFORD, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DALE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES;
CHRISSIE N. BOYD; DALE COUNTY, Alabama,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-98-3625-3-17BC)
Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999
Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ephrain Reliford, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ephrain Reliford, Jr., a South Carolina inmate, appeals the
district court’s orders dismissing his civil action under 28
U.S.C.A. § 1915A(b)(1) (West Supp. 1998) and denying his motion to
reconsider. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find
that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal
on the reasoning of the district court. See Reliford v. Dale
County Dep’t of Human Resources, No. CA-98-3625-3-17BC (D.S.C. Feb.
4 & 26, 1999).* 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.
DISMISSED
*
The motion for reconsideration from which Reliford appeals
was filed on February 25 and entered on the district court’s docket
on February 26, 1999, and the order appealed from was filed on
February 3 and entered on the district court’s docket on February
4, 1999, in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a). See
Wilson v. Murray,
806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2