Yvonne Nelson v. Department of Social Services

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Yvonne Nelson v. Department of Social Services

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1979

YVONNE NELSON; D. N.; D. N,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, City of Conway; EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COMMISSION; HORRY COUNTY SCHOOLS; HORRY COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; HORRY GEORGETOWN TECHNICAL COLLEGE; HOUSING AUTHORITIES; SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION; WACCAMAW MENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

MEDICAID,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:10-cv-03119-RBH)

Submitted: February 9, 2012 Decided: February 13, 2012

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Yvonne Nelson, D.N., D.N., Appellants Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; John Betts McCutcheon, Jr., Lisa Arlene Thomas, THOMPSON & HENRY, PA, Conway, South Carolina; Kimberly Kelley Blackburn, Kenneth Lendren Childs, Allen Dean Smith, CHILDS & HALLIGAN, Columbia, South Carolina; Christie Valerie Newman, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Yvonne Nelson and her two minor children appeal the

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge and granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss

the complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Nelson v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., No.

4:10-cv-03119-RBH (D.S.C. filed Aug. 25, 2011; entered Aug. 26,

2011). We deny Nelson’s motion for settlement and motion for

explanation as moot. 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

Reference

Status
Unpublished