Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    Williams v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Larry Williams, a prisoner, filed a Section 1983 complaint against prison officials alleging civil rights violations. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied Williams relief. Williams appealed. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision to deny Williams relief. The appellate court also denied Williams' request for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Williams v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Larry Williams, a prisoner, filed a Section 1983 complaint against prison officials alleging civil rights violations. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied Williams relief. Williams appealed. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision to deny Williams relief. The appellate court also denied Williams' request for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-06-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-6109

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Larry Williams, a prisoner, filed a Section 1983 complaint against prison officials alleging civil rights violations. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied Williams relief. Williams appealed. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision to deny Williams relief. The appellate court also denied Williams' request for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    Williams v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Larry Williams, a prisoner, filed a Section 1983 complaint against prison officials alleging civil rights violations. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied Williams relief. Williams appealed. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision to deny Williams relief. The appellate court also denied Williams' request for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 11-6109

    LARRY WILLIAMS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN W. THOMPSON; MAJOR NETTLES; LIEUTENANT OWENS, as
    shift; CAPTAIN AL COXTE; WARDEN HUNTER; S. JONES, Mail Room
    Staff,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia.
    Margaret B. Seymour, District
    Judge. (3:10-cv-02392-MBS)

    Submitted:

    May 26, 2011

    Decided:

    June 1, 2011

    Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Larry Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Larry

    Williams

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying


    relief

    on

    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2006)

    complaint.

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We

    have

    Accordingly,

    although we grant leave to proceed under the Prisoner Litigation


    Reform Act, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
    court.

    Williams v. Thompson, No. 3:10-cv-02392-MBS (D.S.C. Jan.

    14, 2011).
    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like