Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It affirms the district court's denial of relief to James Calvin Rothwell in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina officials. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the same reasoning. It determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the case details and legal issues were clearly presented in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-04-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 83 F.3d 416 Docket: 95-7691

    Original Title

    James Calvin Rothwell v. Carroll A. Campbell, Governor, State of South Carolina Parker Evatt, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections Gene Baker Tony Ellis, 83 F.3d 416, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It affirms the district court's denial of relief to James Calvin Rothwell in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina officials. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the same reasoning. It determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the case details and legal issues were clearly presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    3 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It affirms the district court's denial of relief to James Calvin Rothwell in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina officials. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the same reasoning. It determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the case details and legal issues were clearly presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    83 F.

    3d 416

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


    of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    James Calvin ROTHWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Carroll A. CAMPBELL, Governor, State of South Carolina;
    Parker Evatt, Commissioner, South Carolina
    Department of Corrections; Gene Baker;
    Tony Ellis, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 95-7691.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: April 15, 1996.
    Decided: April 25, 1996.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South
    Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-932194-2-2AJ)
    James Calvin Rothwell, Appellant Pro Se. John Gregg McMaster, Jr.,
    TOMPKINS & MCMASTER, Columbia, South Carolina; Robert Eric
    Petersen, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    D.S.C.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's
    opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no
    reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
    Rothwell v. Campbell, No. CA-93-2194-2-2AJ (D.S.C. Oct. 3, 1995). 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

    You might also like