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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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. . Mailed to: Alfred LaSure. [16-7338]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ALFRED WILLIAM LASURE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
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.
January 31, 2017
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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
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.
Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
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
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?