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)
08-7587•David Stevens v. Ernest Wilson; South Carolina Department of Corrections; Ridgeville Police Department
08-7587Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit03.06.2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7587
DAVID STEVENS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ERNEST WILSON; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS;
RIDGEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (0:07-cv-03590-JFA)
Submitted: May 28, 2009 Decided: June 3, 2009
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Stevens, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
David Stevens appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and
dismissing without prejudice his 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. Stevens v. Wilson, No. 0:07-cv-03590-JFA
(D.S.C. filed July 29, 2008 & entered July 30, 2008). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.