Tyrone C. Cooper v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Dan E. Huff Molly Wannaker, D/w Tommy L. Hughston, Jr., Judge, in Their Official Capacities

907 F.2d 1137
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 9, 1990
Docket90-6556
StatusUnpublished

This text of 907 F.2d 1137 (Tyrone C. Cooper v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Dan E. Huff Molly Wannaker, D/w Tommy L. Hughston, Jr., Judge, in Their Official Capacities) 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
Tyrone C. Cooper v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Dan E. Huff Molly Wannaker, D/w Tommy L. Hughston, Jr., Judge, in Their Official Capacities, 907 F.2d 1137 (4th Cir. 1990).

Opinion

907 F.2d 1137
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Tyrone C. COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Dan E. Huff;
Molly Wannaker, D/W; Tommy L. Hughston, Jr.,
Judge, in their official capacities,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6556.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 4, 1990.
Decided June 15, 1990.
Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied July 9, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. C. Weston Houck, District Judge. (C/A No. 88-123-3)

Tyrone C. Cooper, appellant pro se.

Robert Eric Petersen, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Columbia, S.C., for Appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone C. Cooper appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Cooper v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, CA-88-123-3 (D.S.C. Mar. 5, 1990). 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.

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

Related

Foxx v. Baines
907 F.2d 1137 (Fourth Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
907 F.2d 1137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tyrone-c-cooper-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections-dan-e-huff-ca4-1990.