Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rogers v. Brinkley, 07-6477 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-6477 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 29, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6477 HAYWARD LEON ROGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LIEUTENANT JOHN BRINKLEY, Guard, McCormick Correctional Institution; MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (8:06-cv-01278-MBS) Submitted: June 21, 2007 Decided: June 29, 2007 B
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6477 HAYWARD LEON ROGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LIEUTENANT JOHN BRINKLEY, Guard, McCormick Correctional Institution; MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (8:06-cv-01278-MBS) Submitted: June 21, 2007 Decided: June 29, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hayward Leon Rogers, Appellant Pro Se. Roy F. Laney, Nikole Deanna Haltiwanger, Thomas Lowndes Pope, RILEY, POPE & LANEY, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Hayward Leon Rogers 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 deny Rogers’ motion to remand the case and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rogers v. Brinkley, No. 8:06-cv-01278-MBS (D.S.C. Mar. 14, 2007). 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