Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views1 page
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Theron Johnny Maxton filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Vaughn Jackson and Michael Moore. The district court denied relief on Maxton's complaint. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-06-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 89 F.3d 829 Docket: 96-6467

    Original Title

    Theron Johnny Maxton v. Vaughn Jackson, Captain, Msu at Kirkland Correctional Institution Michael Moore, Director of Scdc, 89 F.3d 829, 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 is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Theron Johnny Maxton filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Vaughn Jackson and Michael Moore. The district court denied relief on Maxton's complaint. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    3 views1 page

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Theron Johnny Maxton filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Vaughn Jackson and Michael Moore. The district court denied relief on Maxton's complaint. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    89 F.

    3d 829

    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.
    Theron Johnny MAXTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Vaughn JACKSON, Captain, MSU at Kirkland Correctional
    Institution; Michael Moore, Director of SCDC,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 96-6467.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted May 16, 1996.
    Decided June 6, 1996.

    Theron Johnny Maxton, Appellant Pro Se.


    Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    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.
    Maxton v. Jackson, No. CA-95-3688-3-6BC (D.S.C. Mar. 12, 1996). 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