The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-7632•SUPREME OUTSPOKEN 7 ALLAH, a/k/a Mark Meyers v. BENJAMIN MONTGOMERY, Deputy Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections
02-7632Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 3, 2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7632
SUPREME OUTSPOKEN 7 ALLAH, a/k/a Mark Meyers,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BENJAMIN MONTGOMERY, Deputy Director, South
Carolina Department of Corrections; GERALDINE
MIRO, Warden, Allendale Correctional
Institution; JOHN PATE, Assistant Warden,
Allendale Correctional Institution; BERNARD
WALKER, Major, Allendale Correctional
Institution,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CA-01-958-0-24BF)
Submitted: January 17, 2003 Decided: February 3, 2003
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Supreme Outspoken 7 Allah, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Frederick
Lindemann, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellees.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Supreme Outspoken 7 Allah appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice
for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. See Allah v. Montgomery, No.
CA-01-958-0-24BF (D.S.C. Sept. 30, 2002). We deny Allah’s motion
for production of documents, his motion for an injunction, his
motion to amend, his motion for declaratory judgment, his motion
for an award of compensatory and punitive damages, his motion to
review the record in the Clerk’s Office, his motion for sanctions,
his motion to strike, and his motion for default judgment. 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.