Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
04-6497•Danny G. Williams v. GEORGE P. GINTOLI, Director of South Carolina Department of Mental Health (SCDMH)
04-6497Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit04.06.2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6497
DANNY G. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GEORGE P. GINTOLI, Director of South Carolina
Department of Mental Health (SCDMH); W.
RUSSELL HUGHES, Doctor and CEO of the Behavior
Disorders Treatment Program (BDTP); BRENDA E.
YOUNG-RICE, Program Manager for BDTP;
ELIZABETH HALL, Division Director of Public
Safety; DOUG COCHRAN, JD, Director of Client
Advocacy; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL
HEALTH,
Defendants - Appellees,
---------------------------------------------
LEONARD A. SMITH,
Movant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CA-03-1102-9-24)
Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 4, 2004
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
Danny G. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Vinton DeVane Lide, Sheally
Venus Poe, VINTON D. LIDE & ASSOCIATES, Lexington, South Carolina,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Danny G. Williams appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. See Williams v.
Gintoli, No. CA-03-1102-9-24 (D.S.C. Mar. 9, 2004). 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 of 3 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.