UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1826

TANYA ANGE DAVIS; BARBARA WILLIAMS; MICHAEL ANGE; KAREN ANGE; JOHN ANGE; SANDRA ANGE, incompetent, by her next friend, John Ange; TANYA JEAN ANGE, infant, by her next friend, Barbara Williams; GABRIELLE ANGE, infant, by next friend, Michael Ange; BARBARA JEAN ANGE, infant, by her next friend, John Ange,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE; JOHN OLIVER, Deputy City Attorney; WALTER D. CLARK, Director, Depart- ment of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; CATHERINE B. GOLDBERG, Assistant Director, Department of Social Services, City of Chesa- peake; CAROL B. KERPELMAN, Chief of Services, Department of Social Services, City of Chesa- peake; PHYLLIS B. STEEN, Supervisor of Foster Care, Department of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; MARGARET B. HOUSTON, Social Worker, Department of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; JAMES D. CLARK, Social Worker, Department of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; DONNA J. CAMPBELL, Social Worker, Department of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; SUSAN B. WALLACE, Social Worker, Department of Social Services, City of Chesapeake; RAYMOND D. MCCOY, LCSW; WEARE A. ZWEMER, LCP,

Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. John A. MacKenzie, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-524-2)

Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 20, 1997

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tanya Ange Davis, Barbara Williams, Michael Ange, Karen Ange, John Ange, Sandra Ange, Tanya Jan Ange, Gabrielle Ange, Barbara Jean Ange, Appellants Pro Se. Darlene Paige Bradberry, Thomas Jeffrey Salb, BREEDEN, MACMILLAN & GREEN, Norfolk, Virginia; Ronald Stuart Hallman, City Attorney, Chesapeake, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

2 PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court's order denying relief on

their

(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. Davis v. City of Chesapeake, No. CA-95-524-2 (E.D. Va. May 17, 1996). We deny Appel-

lants' motions for an informal hearing and for the appointment of

counsel. 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

3