Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views1 page
    Larry Darnell Jordan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Thomas Ray Sims, the solicitor for Dorchester County, the Sheriff of Dorchester County, and Margie Carn Mckissick, the clerk of court for Dorchester County. The district court denied relief on Jordan'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 to deny relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-01-17 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 74 F.3d 1232 Docket: 95-7454

    Original Title

    Larry Darnell Jordan v. Thomas Ray Sims, Solicitor for Dorchester County Sheriff of Dorchester County, South Carolina Margie Carn McKissick Clerk of Court, Dorchester County, 74 F.3d 1232, 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
    Larry Darnell Jordan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Thomas Ray Sims, the solicitor for Dorchester County, the Sheriff of Dorchester County, and Margie Carn Mckissick, the clerk of court for Dorchester County. The district court denied relief on Jordan'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 to deny relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Larry Darnell Jordan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Thomas Ray Sims, the solicitor for Dorchester County, the Sheriff of Dorchester County, and Margie Carn Mckissick, the clerk of court for Dorchester County. The district court denied relief on Jordan'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 to deny relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    74 F.

    3d 1232
    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.

    Larry Darnell JORDAN, Plaintiff--Appellant,


    v.
    Thomas Ray SIMS, Solicitor for Dorchester County; Sheriff
    of Dorchester County, South Carolina; Margie Carn
    Mckissick, Clerk of Court, Dorchester
    County, Defendants--Appellees.
    No. 95-7454.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Dec. 14, 1995.
    Decided Jan. 17, 1996.

    Larry Darnell Jordan, Appellant Pro Se.


    Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 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.
    Jordan v. Sims, No. CA-95-1933-3-OBC (D.S.C. Aug. 29, 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