Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kollyns v. Watson, 06-7700 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-7700 Visitors: 35
Filed: Feb. 09, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7700 KRIS SARAYN KOLLYNS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and JONATHAN C. FRANCIS; KYLE CRISCO, Plaintiffs, versus DR. SELMAN WATSON; MARTHA WILLIAMS, in their personal capacities; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, for injunctive relief, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7700 KRIS SARAYN KOLLYNS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and JONATHAN C. FRANCIS; KYLE CRISCO, Plaintiffs, versus DR. SELMAN WATSON; MARTHA WILLIAMS, in their personal capacities; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, for injunctive relief, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:05-cv-02401-JFA) Submitted: January 17, 2007 Decided: February 9, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kris Sarayn Kollyns, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Todd Darwin, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR, GUNN & BRADFORD, PA, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Kris Sarayn Kollyns appeals the district court’s judgment and 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Kollyns v. Watson, No. 3:05-cv-02401-JFA (D.S.C. filed Sept. 22, 2006; entered Sept. 25, 2006). 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 - 3 -
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