Ronnie Vanzant v. Berry Weissgla


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:15-cv-02876-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000112853]. Mailed to: Ronnie Joe Vanzant. [17-6032]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6032 Doc: 12 Filed: 07/06/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6032 RONNIE JOE VANZANT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. BERRY WEISSGLASS; DR. THEODOLPH JACOBS; KAREN HUFFMAN, Physician Assistant, Defendants – Appellees, and CAROLINA CENTER FOR OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; DIRECTOR DAWN FRAZIER; NURSE MICHAEL MURRY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (8:15-cv-02876-RBH) Submitted: June 15, 2017 Before KING, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Decided: July 6, 2017 Appeal: 17-6032 Doc: 12 Filed: 07/06/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Ronnie Joe Vanzant, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Willcox Buyck, Gordon Wade Cooper, BUYCK SANDERS & SIMMONS, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 17-6032 Doc: 12 Filed: 07/06/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Ronnie Joe Vanzant appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to the Defendants on Vanzant’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action claiming deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs and the court’s order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. Vanzant v. Weissglass, No. 8:15-cv-02876-RBH (D.S.C., Sept. 6, 2016 & Dec. 19, 2016). 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 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?