Kollyns v. Beasley

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Kollyns v. Beasley

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7328

KRISTOPHER S. KOLLYNS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DAVID BEASLEY; MICHAEL B. MOORE; TERRY L. BROOKS; ELAINE ROBINSON; LUCY HODGES; WILBER WILKS; S. R. WITOWSKI; C. STEPHEN SANDERS; STEVE CLAYTOR; JACK JOHNSON; SAM LAP, in both their personal and official capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-2405-3-17BC)

Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kristopher S. Kollyns, Appellant Pro Se. Shelton Sterling Laney, III, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR, GUNN & BRADFORD, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Kristopher S. Kollyns appeals the district court's order

accepting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his

42 U.S.C.A. § 1983

(West Supp. 1999)

complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Kollyns v. Beasley, No.

CA-98-2405-3-17BC (D.S.C. Sept. 17, 1999).* 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

* Although the district court's judgment or order is marked as "filed" on Sept. 14, 1999, the district court's records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on Sept. 17, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court's decision. See Wilson v. Murray,

806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35

(4th Cir. 1986).

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished