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)
17-1507•William A. Taccino v. Patrick Morrisey
17-1507Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 3, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1507
WILLIAM A. TACCINO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PATRICK MORRISEY; SUE ROBEY; J. COURRIER; JOE E. MILLER;
JAMES DAVIS; TROOPER JOHN DROPPLEMAN; NELSON MICHAEL;
MICHAEL SHAY; KEITH BRADSHAW; BRIDGET COHEE; TRACEY B.
EBERLING; JASON P. FOSTER; RALPH BRADY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia,
at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:16-cv-00164-GMG-RWT)
Submitted: September 19, 2017 Decided: October 3, 2017
Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William A. Taccino, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
William A. Taccino appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Taccino v. Morrisey¸ No. 3:16-cv-00164-GMG-RWT (N.D.W. Va.
Mar. 21, 2017). 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.