Steven Barnes v. George Dedmondt
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:08-cv-00002-MBS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998430250] [09-8243, 10-6113]
<![CDATA[
Steven Barnes v. George Dedmondt
Doc. 0
Case: 09-8243 Document: 28
Date Filed: 09/22/2010
Page: 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-8243 STEVEN LEWIS BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GEORGE DEDMONDT; BRAIN WILLIAMS; SHADELL STEVENS; MARCUS SMITH; POLLY HALL; A. DELL DOBEY; HEIDI PRESSLEY; RANDY DORAN; LT. KARREN JAGGERS, official and individual capacity, Defendants Appellees, and BRENDA B. CARPENTER, Defendant.
No. 10-6113 STEVEN LEWIS BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GEORGE DEDMONDT; BRAIN WILLIAMS; SHADELL STEVENS; MARCUS SMITH; POLLY HALL; A. DELL DOBEY; HEIDI PRESSLEY; RANDY DORAN; LT. KARREN JAGGERS, official and individual capacity, Defendants Appellees, and
Dockets.Justia.com
Case: 09-8243 Document: 28
Date Filed: 09/22/2010
Page: 2
BRENDA B. CARPENTER; O-LEE STURKEY, Defendants.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (4:08-cv-00002-MBS) Submitted: September 8, 2010 Decided: September 22, 2010
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven Lewis Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. William Henry Davidson, II, Daniel C. Plyler, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Case: 09-8243 Document: 28
Date Filed: 09/22/2010
Page: 3
PER CURIAM: Steven Lewis Barnes appeals the district court's
orders adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying reconsideration. Barnes also challenges several pretrial orders
denying appointment of counsel, denying extensions of time for discovery and to object to the report and recommendation, and denying recusal of the magistrate judge. record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the
Accordingly, we affirm for Barnes v. Dedmondt, We
the reasons stated by the district court.
No. 4:08-cv-00002-MBS (D.S.C. Sept. 29 & Dec. 10, 2009). 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
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?
