Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    Rodney Young v. Christopher Griffin, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Rodney David Young appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its November 15, 2013 decision. The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit is not binding legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Rodney Young v. Christopher Griffin, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    Rodney David Young appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its November 15, 2013 decision. The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit is not binding legal precedent.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-03-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-7940

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Rodney David Young appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its November 15, 2013 decision. The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit is not binding legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    2 views2 pages

    Rodney Young v. Christopher Griffin, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Rodney David Young appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its November 15, 2013 decision. The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit is not binding legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-7940

    RODNEY DAVID YOUNG,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    CHRISTOPHER GRIFFIN;
    LIEUTENANT D. SISCO,

    TAMMY

    HAMILTON;

    DR.

    MARY

    HAMMOND;

    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Aiken.
    Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
    (1:12-cv-03009-TMC)

    Submitted:

    February 27, 2014

    Decided:

    March 5, 2014

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Rodney David Young, Appellant Pro Se.


    Nathaniel Heyward
    Clarkson, III, Amy Miller Snyder, CLARKSON WALSH TERRELL &
    COULTER, PA, Greenville, South Carolina; Russell W. Harter, Jr.,
    CHAPMAN, HARTER & HARTER, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Rodney David Young appeals the district courts order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
    relief

    on

    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2006)

    complaint.

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.


    we

    affirm

    for

    the

    reasons

    stated

    by

    the

    We

    have

    Accordingly,

    district

    court.

    Young v. Griffin, No. 1:12-cv-03009-TMC (D.S.C. Nov. 15, 2013).


    We

    dispense

    contentions

    with
    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the

    facts

    and

    the

    materials

    legal
    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like