Thomas v. Witkowski
Thomas v. Witkowski
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7399
CHARLES MANSEL THOMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. R. WITKOWSKI, Warden, P.C.I.; STAN BURKE, Deputy Warden, P.C.I,; UNKNOWN MALE OFFICERS OF 1ST, 2ND, AND 3RD SHIFTS, P.C.I.; UNKNOWN FEMALE SECRETARY TO STAN BURKE, P.C.I.; SER- GEANT BROWN, 1st Shift Assistant Supervisor, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-95-1109-23BD)
Submitted: March 27, 1997 Decided: April 3, 1997 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Mansel Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Keith Wray, II, GIBBES, GALLIVAN, WHITE & BOYD, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) 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. Thomas v. Witkowski, No. CA-95-1109-23BD (D.S.C. Aug. 8, 1996). We deny the motion for oral argument and 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.