Alfred LaSure v. SC Mental Health


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to strike [999997755-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999949805-2]. Originating case number: 9:15-cv-01357-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000016867]. Mailed to: Alfred LaSure. [16-7338]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7338 Doc: 21 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7338 ALFRED WILLIAM LASURE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SC MENTAL HEALTH; CYNTHIA HELFF, Program Director, Individually and in her Official Capacity; JOHN MCGILL, State Director, In his Official and Individual Capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (9:15-cv-01357-RBH) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alfred LaSure, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Albert Kinney, Jr., Daniel Roy Settana, Jr., MCKAY LAW FIRM, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7338 Doc: 21 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Alfred William LaSure appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, as modified, and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. have reviewed the record and find no reversible We error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. LaSure v. SC Mental Health, No. 9:15-cv-01357-RBH (D.S.C. Sept. 20, 2016). In light of this disposition, we deny as moot the Appellees’ motion to strike LaSure’s second informal opening brief and amended informal opening brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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?