Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    Hendricks v. Galloway, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Edward Hendricks on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its previous ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Hendricks v. Galloway, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Edward Hendricks on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its previous ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-08-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-6609

    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 relief to Larry Edward Hendricks on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its previous ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    Hendricks v. Galloway, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Larry Edward Hendricks on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its previous ruling.

    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. 04-6609

    LARRY EDWARD HENDRICKS,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    BARRY GALLOWAY; LEROY CARTLEDGE; CURRY; BUSH;
    CATHERINE
    KENDALL;
    JAMES
    PARKER;
    COLIE
    RUSHTON; MARY D. ANDERSON; SQUIRES; BARTON
    VINCENT; GARY D. MAYNARD; JOHN DOE 1; JOHN DOE
    2; JOHN DOE 3; JOHN DOE 4,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia.
    David C. Norton, District Judge.
    (CA-03-740-18BC)

    Submitted:

    July 14, 2004

    Decided:

    August 3, 2004

    Before WIDENER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Larry Edward Hendricks, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Pruitt,


    MCDONALD, PATRICK, TINSLEY, BAGGETT & POSTON, Greenwood, South
    Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Larry Edward Hendricks appeals the district courts order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.

    We have reviewed

    the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on


    the reasoning of the district court.

    See Hendricks v. Galloway,

    No. CA-03-740-18BC (D.S.C. Mar. 1, 2004).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like