U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1996

Drew Howard Brinson v. Michael M. Moore Laurie F. Bessinger Doctor Boulware John Doe Doctors Vaughn Jackson, Captain Correctional Officer Cannon

Drew Howard Brinson v. Michael M. Moore Laurie F. Bessinger Doctor Boulware John Doe Doctors Vaughn Jackson, Captain Correctional Officer Cannon
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 2, 1996
89 F.3d 827; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 34577; 1996 WL 366253 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Drew Howard Brinson v. Michael M. Moore Laurie F. Bessinger Doctor Boulware John Doe Doctors Vaughn Jackson, Captain Correctional Officer Cannon

Opinion

89 F.3d 827

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Drew Howard BRINSON, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Michael M. MOORE; Laurie F. Bessinger; Doctor Boulware;
John Doe Doctors; Vaughn Jackson, Captain;
Correctional Officer Cannon,
Defendants--Appellees.

No. 96-6516.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 20, 1996.
Decided July 2, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2076-6-6AK)

Drew Howard Brinson, Appellant Pro Se. R. Lewis Johnson, Richard Carson Thomas, BARNES, ALFORD, STORK & JOHNSON, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Brinson v. Moore, No. CA-95-2076-6-6AK (D.S.C. Mar. 19, 1996). 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.