Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Rosemond v. Bruck, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Andre Kevin Rosemond's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in Rosemond v. Bruck, No. CA-01-4332-0-23-BD (D.S.C. June 11, 2002). The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-08-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-7008

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Andre Kevin Rosemond's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in Rosemond v. Bruck, No. CA-01-4332-0-23-BD (D.S.C. June 11, 2002). The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Rosemond v. Bruck, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Andre Kevin Rosemond's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in Rosemond v. Bruck, No. CA-01-4332-0-23-BD (D.S.C. June 11, 2002). The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the 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. 02-7008

    ANDRE KEVIN ROSEMOND,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DAVID BRUCK; ROBERT LOMINACK; DONALD MORGAN;
    LAWRENCE CANTEY,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
    Patrick Michael Duffy, District
    Judge. (CA-01-4332-0-23-BD)

    Submitted:

    August 15, 2002

    Decided:

    August 26, 2002

    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Andre Kevin Rosemond, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Andre
    denying

    Kevin

    relief

    complaint.

    Rosemond

    on

    his

    42

    appeals

    the

    U.S.C.A.

    district
    1983

    courts

    (West

    Supp.

    order
    2001)

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts

    opinion accepting the magistrate judges recommendation and find no


    reversible error.
    district court.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the


    See Rosemond v. Bruck, No. CA-01-4332-0-23-BD

    (D.S.C. June 11, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the
    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like