Wagner v. Charleston County Jail
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
THEODORE THOMAS WAGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ANGIE SMITH; FNU LNU, Inmate, unknown at this time, Plaintiffs, versus CHARLESTON COUNTY JAIL; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants - Appellees.
THEODORE THOMAS WAGNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ANGIE SMITH; FNU LNU, Inmate, unknown at this time, Plaintiffs, versus
CHARLESTON COUNTY JAIL; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge; Joseph R. McCrorey, Magistrate Judge. (3:05-cv-01435-GRA)
July 19, 2006
July 28, 2006
Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Theodore Thomas Wagner, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Willcox Buyck, Darren K. Sanders, BUYCK LAW FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina; Robert Gerald Chambers, Jr., TURNER & PADGETT, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM: Theodore Thomas Wagner appeals the magistrate judge's order denying his motion for an extension of time to serve process on unidentified Defendants and the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record
Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the magistrate judge and the district court. Wagner v. Charleston County Jail, No. 3:05-cv-01435-GRA (D.S.C. filed Jan. 9, 2006 & entered Jan. 10, 2006; filed Feb. 2, 2006 & entered Feb. 3, 2006). facts and legal before We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the
contentions the court
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?