Joshua Gallishaw v. Raymond Reed


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 9:09-cv-02566-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998440100] [10-7003]

Download PDF
Joshua Gallishaw v. Raymond Reed Doc. 0 Case: 10-7003 Document: 23 Date Filed: 10/06/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7003 JOSHUA GALLISHAW, a/k/a Joshua Latron Gallishaw, Plaintiff Appellant, v. RAYMOND REED, Warden, Manning CI; C. MARSH, Major; L. DIAMOND; JERREY CORUM; STEVENSON, Warden NFN; J. C. BROWN; DIRECTOR OZMINT; GOLLACH, Lt; MS. WHITTAKER, SMU Classification Department; MRS. TAYLOR, Inmate Grievance Coordinator; ANN HALLMAN, Headquarters for Grievance Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (9:09-cv-02566-CMC) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 6, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joshua Gallishaw, Appellant Pro Se. John Betts McCutcheon, Jr., Lisa Arlene Thomas, THOMPSON & HENRY, PA, Conway, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 10-7003 Document: 23 Date Filed: 10/06/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Joshua Gallishaw appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. we affirm for the reasons stated by the Accordingly, court. district Gallishaw v. Reed, No. 9:09-cv-02566-CMC (D.S.C. June 24, 2010). 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 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?