Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Moore v. Williams, 02-6575 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6575 Visitors: 26
Filed: Jun. 27, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6575 THADESE MOORE, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAMERON G. CHANDLER, Assistant U. S. Attorney; CHARLES E. SIMMONS, JR., Senior US District Judge; BRISTOW MARCHANT, US Magistrate Judge; CHRISTI G. SEXTON, Internal Revenue Service, Special Agent; DAVID BEALL, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Special Agent; MARVIN CAUGHMAN; JAMES R. PARKS, Supervising U.S. Probation Officer, Defendants - Appellees, and CHARLES H. WILLIA
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6575 THADESE MOORE, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAMERON G. CHANDLER, Assistant U. S. Attorney; CHARLES E. SIMMONS, JR., Senior US District Judge; BRISTOW MARCHANT, US Magistrate Judge; CHRISTI G. SEXTON, Internal Revenue Service, Special Agent; DAVID BEALL, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Special Agent; MARVIN CAUGHMAN; JAMES R. PARKS, Supervising U.S. Probation Officer, Defendants - Appellees, and CHARLES H. WILLIAMS, P.A.; LIONEL S. LOFTON; PAUL W. PITTARD, JR., Attorney in Fact; STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION; CAPTAIN HEATON, Orangeburg County Narcotics Task Force; SC DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND TAXATION; W. SCOTT PALMER, Personal Representative of Estates; DAVID S. SCHWARTZ, Employee for the County of Orangeburg, South Carolina, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-01-2168-5-22BC) Submitted: June 20, 2002 Decided: June 27, 2002 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thadese Moore, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert F. Daley, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Thadese Moore, Sr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil rights action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Moore v. Williams, No. CA-01-2168-5-22BC (D.S.C. filed Mar. 29, 2002; entered Apr. 1, 2002). 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