Filed: Oct. 10, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6807 CHRISTOPHER A. ODOM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILSON, Maintenance Supervisor; NURSE MICHAELS; OFFICER ROBERTS, LT. DALY, SCDC INJURY INSURANCE POLICY HOLDER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (8:07-cv-00325-PMD) Submitted: September 19, 2007 Decided: October 10, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6807 CHRISTOPHER A. ODOM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILSON, Maintenance Supervisor; NURSE MICHAELS; OFFICER ROBERTS, LT. DALY, SCDC INJURY INSURANCE POLICY HOLDER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (8:07-cv-00325-PMD) Submitted: September 19, 2007 Decided: October 10, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6807 CHRISTOPHER A. ODOM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILSON, Maintenance Supervisor; NURSE MICHAELS; OFFICER ROBERTS, LT. DALY, SCDC INJURY INSURANCE POLICY HOLDER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (8:07-cv-00325-PMD) Submitted: September 19, 2007 Decided: October 10, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher A. Odom, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Christopher A. Odom 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Odom v. Wilson, No. 8:07-cv-00325-PMD (D.S.C. Apr. 30, 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 -
