Filed: Feb. 18, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7684 CHARLES W. PENLAND, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF GREER, South Carolina; KENNETH BOBO, Affiant; MAYOR, City of Greer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03204-HMH) Submitted: December 29, 2008 Decided: February 18, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7684 CHARLES W. PENLAND, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF GREER, South Carolina; KENNETH BOBO, Affiant; MAYOR, City of Greer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03204-HMH) Submitted: December 29, 2008 Decided: February 18, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7684
CHARLES W. PENLAND, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY OF GREER, South Carolina; KENNETH BOBO, Affiant; MAYOR,
City of Greer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (6:07-cv-03204-HMH)
Submitted: December 29, 2008 Decided: February 18, 2009
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles W. Penland, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles W. Penland, Sr., appeals the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000)
complaint. On appeal, Penland has failed to raise any arguments
relevant to the district court’s reasoning for dismissing his
complaint; thus, he has abandoned his claims. Edwards v. City
of Goldsboro,
178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999); 4th Cir. R.
34(b). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district
court. 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