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)
16-1626•Don Boyd v. Bluestein, Nichols, Thompson
16-1626Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 16, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1626
DON BOYD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BLUESTEIN, NICHOLS, THOMPSON AND DELGADO, LLC; JOHN S
NICHOLS, (individually); STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; J EMORY
SMITH, JR, (individually); KATHERINE BRADACS; TRACIE
GOODWIN; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE, (United States
District Court for the District of South Carolina); UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA, THE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:15-cv-04791-JFA)
Submitted: September 13, 2016 Decided: September 16, 2016
Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Don Boyd, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Don Boyd appeals the district court’s order adopting the
magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss Boyd’s civil
complaint against Defendants. We have reviewed the record and
discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s judgment. Boyd v. Bluestein, Nichols, Thompson
& Delgado, LLC, No. 3:15-cv-04791-JFA (D.S.C. Mar. 31, 2016).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.