Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Spigner v. Austin, 02-7184 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-7184 Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7184 ROBERT F. SPIGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES AUSTIN, Chief of the City of Columbia; BOB COBLE, Mayor of Columbia; T. C. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; SHERIFF’S DEPUTY; LEON LOTT, Sheriff of Richland County; P. O., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA- 01-49-3) Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: Oc
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7184 ROBERT F. SPIGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES AUSTIN, Chief of the City of Columbia; BOB COBLE, Mayor of Columbia; T. C. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; SHERIFF’S DEPUTY; LEON LOTT, Sheriff of Richland County; P. O., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA- 01-49-3) Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 31, 2002 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert F. Spigner, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Gordon Cooper, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina; Alice Price Adams, David Leon Morrison, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert F. Spigner appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Spigner v. Austin, No. CA-01- 49-3 (D.S.C. June 18, 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