Williamson v. Clark

Fourth Circuit

Williamson v. Clark

678 F. App'x 95

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 24, 2017·No. No. 16-7483·Published

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Earl Williamson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Order, Williamson v. Clark, No. 8:15-cv-04515-TMC, 2016 WL 5956283 (D.S.C. Oct. 14, 2016), ECF No. 71. 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

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Earl Williamson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Order, Williamson v. Clark, No. 8:15-cv-04515-TMC, 2016 WL 5956283 (D.S.C. Oct. 14, 2016), ECF No. 71. 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

Williamson v. Clark, 678 F. App'x 95 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

678 F. App'x 95 (Williamson v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related