George Cleveland, III v. Judge Daniel Hall
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to accept as timely filed the informal brief [999907305-2] Originating case number: 6:15-cv-04384-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999975664]. Mailed to: G. Cleveland, III. [16-6838]
Appeal: 16-6838
Doc: 15
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6838
GEORGE CLEVELAND, III,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JUDGE DANIEL D. HALL, in his official capacity as Circuit
Court Judge of South Carolina; KAREN C. RATIGAN, in her
official capacity as Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney
General of South Carolina,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
R. Bryan Harwell, District
Judge. (6:15-cv-04384-RBH)
Submitted:
November 22, 2016
Before DIAZ and
Circuit Judge.
THACKER,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
November 28, 2016
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
George Cleveland, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6838
Doc: 15
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
George Cleveland, III, appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief
on
his
42
U.S.C.
§ 1983
(2012)
complaint.
reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
we
affirm
for
the
reasons
stated
by
the
We
have
Accordingly,
district
court.
Cleveland v. Hall, No. 6:15-cv-04384-RBH (D.S.C. May 18, 2016).
We
grant
Cleveland’s
motion
to
accept
as
timely
filed
his
informal brief, and we dispense with oral argument because the
facts
and
materials
legal
before
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
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?