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)
11-6944•Dwayne Williams v. Samuel B. Glover; Robert M. Steward; Barbara A. Scott; Jon E. Ozmint; John Doe; Jane Doe
11-6944Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 9, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6944
DWAYNE WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SAMUEL B. GLOVER; ROBERT M. STEWARD; BARBARA A. SCOTT; JON
E. OZMINT; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(6:10-cv-01591-TLW)
Submitted: December 12, 2011 Decided: January 9, 2012
Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dwayne Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Dwayne Williams appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing Williams’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Williams v. Glover, No.
6:10-cv-01591-TLW (D.S.C. July 11, 2011). 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.