Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Fuller v. Eichor, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Henry Fuller in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit against employees of the Greenville County Detention Center. The court of appeals found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Fuller's complaint. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the lower court's decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-12-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-7388

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Henry Fuller in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit against employees of the Greenville County Detention Center. The court of appeals found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Fuller's complaint. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Fuller v. Eichor, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Henry Fuller in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit against employees of the Greenville County Detention Center. The court of appeals found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Fuller's complaint. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the lower court's decision.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 99-7388

    HENRY A. L. FULLER,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    PERRY
    EICHOR,
    Director;
    CAPTAIN
    LOFTUS;
    LIEUTENANT DAVIS; LIEUTENANT SIMPSON; SERGEANT
    ROBINSON;
    SERGEANT
    VANDERMOSEN;
    SERGEANT
    MCKENNEY; SERGEANT MERRIT; OFFICER COCH; OFFICER ANDERSON; OFFICER RICHARDSON; OFFICER
    MAYBRE; OFFICER PHILLIPS; OFFICER JANE DOE;
    MEDICAL SUPERVISORS NURSE AUSTIN AND NURSE
    MAGGIE, each individually as employees of the
    Greenville County Detention Center,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
    (CA-98-1770-6-24)

    Submitted:

    December 16, 1999

    Decided:

    December 30, 1999

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

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Henry A. L. Fuller, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Franklin Turner, Jr.,


    CLARKSON, FORTSON, WALSH & RHENEY, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina; Matthew Philip Utecht, HAYNSWORTH, MARION, MCKAY & GUERARD,
    Greenville, South Carolina; Thomas Carl Cofield, BARNES, ALFORD,
    STORK & JOHNSON, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Henry Fuller appeals the district courts order denying relief
    on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint.

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district courts opinion accepting the
    magistrate judges recommendation and find no reversible error.
    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
    Fuller v. Eichor, No. CA-98-1770-6-24 (D.S.C. Sept. 29, 1999).

    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

    You might also like