Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Fisher v. Greenville County, 02-6073 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6073 Visitors: 14
Filed: May 15, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6073 NATHAN FISHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; E. E. WARE, Officer #515; T. D. HAMPTON, Officer; K. D. DURHAM, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-3473-2-08) Submitted: April 30, 2002 Decided: May 15, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, an
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6073 NATHAN FISHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; E. E. WARE, Officer #515; T. D. HAMPTON, Officer; K. D. DURHAM, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-3473-2-08) Submitted: April 30, 2002 Decided: May 15, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan Fisher, Appellant Pro Se. Russell W. Harter, Jr., CHAPMAN, HARTER & GROVES, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Nathan Fisher appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) 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. Fisher v. Greenville County Sheriff’s Office, No. CA-99-3473-2-08 (D.S.C. Dec. 17, 2001). 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