James Bryant, Jr. v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Parker Evatt, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections

60 F.3d 820, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24747, 1995 WL 419150
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 6, 1995
Docket95-6007
StatusPublished

This text of 60 F.3d 820 (James Bryant, Jr. v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Parker Evatt, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
James Bryant, Jr. v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Parker Evatt, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections, 60 F.3d 820, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24747, 1995 WL 419150 (4th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

60 F.3d 820
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

James BRYANT, Jr., Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT of CORRECTIONS; Parker Evatt,
Commissioner, South Carolina Department of
Corrections, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6007.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 28, 1995.
Decided July 6, 1995.

James Bryant, Jr., appellant pro se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Columbia, SC, for appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Bryant v. South Carolina Dep't of Corrections, No. CA-94-1067 (D.S.C. Dec. 12, 1994). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 F.3d 820, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24747, 1995 WL 419150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-bryant-jr-v-south-carolina-department-of-cor-ca4-1995.