Filed: Jul. 26, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2428 IRIS G. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PALMETTO BAPTIST HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-05-1901-CMC) Submitted: June 21, 2006 Decided: July 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Iris G. Jackson, Appellant Pr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2428 IRIS G. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PALMETTO BAPTIST HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-05-1901-CMC) Submitted: June 21, 2006 Decided: July 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Iris G. Jackson, Appellant Pro..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2428 IRIS G. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PALMETTO BAPTIST HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-05-1901-CMC) Submitted: June 21, 2006 Decided: July 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Iris G. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. James E. Parham, Jr., Irmo, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Iris G. Jackson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Jackson v. Palmetto Baptist Hosp., No. CA-05-1901-CMC (D.S.C. Nov. 18, 2005). We also deny all pending motions. 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 -
