Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Joseph v. Moore, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Plaintiff Marcus A. Joseph on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court reviewed the record and 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 and dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-03-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-7649

    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    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Plaintiff Marcus A. Joseph on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court reviewed the record and 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 and dispensed with oral argument as 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 views2 pages

    Joseph v. Moore, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Plaintiff Marcus A. Joseph on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court reviewed the record and 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 and dispensed with oral argument as 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 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-7649

    MARCUS A. JOSEPH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHAEL MOORE, Director; LAURIE F. BESSINGER,
    Warden; R. ADAMS, Lieutenant, ASU Supervisor,
    in their individual and official capacities,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (CA-95-3516-2-17AJ)
    Submitted:

    March 13, 1997

    Decided:

    March 19, 1997

    Before HALL, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Marcus A. Joseph, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Kendrick Bell, ROBINSON,
    MCFADDEN & MOORE, P.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on
    his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1994) 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. Joseph v. Moore, No. CA-953516-2-17AJ (D.S.C. Oct. 3, 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