James Nelson, A/K/A Jimmie Nelson v. W. Dodson, Correctional Officer John J. Thomas, Correctional Officer Angela P. Ruing, Hearing Officer

Fourth Circuit

James Nelson, A/K/A Jimmie Nelson v. W. Dodson, Correctional Officer John J. Thomas, Correctional Officer Angela P. Ruing, Hearing Officer

53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16746, 1995 WL 263464

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 5, 1995

Docket94-7071

StatusPublished

This text of 53 F.3d 328 (James Nelson, A/K/A Jimmie Nelson v. W. Dodson, Correctional Officer John J. Thomas, Correctional Officer Angela P. Ruing, Hearing Officer) 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 Nelson, A/K/A Jimmie Nelson v. W. Dodson, Correctional Officer John J. Thomas, Correctional Officer Angela P. Ruing, Hearing Officer, 53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16746, 1995 WL 263464 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

53 F.3d 328
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 NELSON, a/k/a Jimmie Nelson, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
W. DODSON, Correctional Officer; John J. Thomas,
Correctional Officer; Angela P. Ruing, Hearing
Officer, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 94-7071.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 28, 1995.
Decided May 5, 1995.

James Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra J. Senn, STUCKEY & KOBROVSKY, Charleston, SC, for Appellees.

Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

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.1 Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nelson v. Dodson, No. CA-93-1855 (D.S.C. Aug. 23, 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.2

AFFIRMED

1

The district court did not accept the magistrate judge's report in its entirety. Among the magistrate judge's recommendations was a suggestion that the Appellant be charged with costs and that he be denied further leave to proceed in forma pauperis until such costs were paid. The district court declined to adopt this portion of the magistrate judge's report

2

We also deny Appellant's motion for a district court transcript to be produced at government expense

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

53 F.3d 328
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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 NELSON, a/k/a Jimmie Nelson, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
W. DODSON, Correctional Officer; John J. Thomas,
Correctional Officer; Angela P. Ruing, Hearing
Officer, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 94-7071.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 28, 1995.
Decided May 5, 1995.

James Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra J. Senn, STUCKEY & KOBROVSKY, Charleston, SC, for Appellees.

Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

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.1 Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nelson v. Dodson, No. CA-93-1855 (D.S.C. Aug. 23, 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.2

AFFIRMED

1

The district court did not accept the magistrate judge's report in its entirety. Among the magistrate judge's recommendations was a suggestion that the Appellant be charged with costs and that he be denied further leave to proceed in forma pauperis until such costs were paid. The district court declined to adopt this portion of the magistrate judge's report

2

We also deny Appellant's motion for a district court transcript to be produced at government expense

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16746, 1995 WL 263464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-nelson-aka-jimmie-nelson-v-w-dodson-correcti-ca4-1995.