U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2010

Patterson v. Barber

Patterson v. Barber
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided October 7, 2010

Patterson v. Barber

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1861

PATRICIA T. PATTERSON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JAMES R. BARBER, III; GEORGE FUNDERBURK; SUSAN BARDEN; DAVID HUFFSTERTLER, Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (0:10-cv-00025-MBS)

Submitted: September 30, 2010 Decided: October 7, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Patricia T. Patterson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Patricia T. Patterson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Patterson v. Barber, No. 0:10-cv-00025-MBS (D.S.C. June 10, 2010). 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.