Filed: Dec. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7219 RONALD L. LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. R. SCOTT JOYE, Esq., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (4:13-cv-01615-RMG) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald L. Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7219 RONALD L. LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. R. SCOTT JOYE, Esq., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (4:13-cv-01615-RMG) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald L. Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpub..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7219
RONALD L. LEGG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
R. SCOTT JOYE, Esq.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (4:13-cv-01615-RMG)
Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013
Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald L. Legg, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald L. Legg appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Legg v. Joye, No. 4:13-cv-01615-RMG
(D.S.C. July 15, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2