Cheryl Jones v. Vernon Beatty
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
CHERYL J. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VERNON D. BEATTY; BRENDA LYLES; CHIEF FISCHER; TYRONE GILMORE; AUDREY GRANT, Doctor; JOYCE LIPSCOMB; CITY-COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG; B. BARNET, Mayor; SHEVELLE PORTER, Weed See Board of Directors; GOVERNOR SANFORD; US HUD; SPARTANBURG HOUSING AUTHORITY; OCR-ATL; SEN GLENN REESE; US BOB INGLIS; COP-POLICE PROGRAM; SAVE THE CHILDREN INTERN; GREAT PREV PROGRAM DIRECTOR; AMERICORY VISTA FOSTER GRANDPART; BUTCH JAMES GREER; GREY TOLBERT; CHERYL HARLESTON; PARK & RECREATION; DALE WELLS; PRESENT COMMUNITY REL CHP; INTERIM DIR JETER; MARY JETER, wife; BENJAMIN WRIGHT; PAULA WIGGS; STAFF-BOARD OF DIRECTORS STTA; MARY THOMAS; SPARTANBURG COUNTY FOUNDATION; CHRISTINE OGLESBY; BEN SNODDY, Reverend; LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR BAUER, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:09-cv-00535-HMH)
September 10, 2009
September 14, 2009
Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cheryl J. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Cheryl adopting judge to and J. Jones appeals the district of court's the order
failure to state a claim. to a magistrate judge
The district court referred this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied
and advised Jones that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning,
Jones failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The magistrate timely filing of specific is objections to to a
appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of
Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Jones
Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
has waived appellate review by failing to file any objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional
process. AFFIRMED 2
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?