Adib Ramez Makdessi v. Ayers , 637 F. App'x 88 ( 2015 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7112
ADIB EDDIE RAMEZ MAKDESSI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
AYERS, Correctional Officer; POPE, Correctional Officer;
JOHNSON, Correctional Officer; MAJOR R. KELLY, Chief of
Security, Keen Mountain Correctional Center,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of DOC; JOHN DOE, Director of
Western Regional; GEORGE HINKLE, Regional Administrator; L.
J. FLEMING, Warden; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE; ROY CLARY, Assistant
Warden, Keen Mountain Correctional Center; MAJOR GALLIHAR,
Red Onion Prison; LT. MCQUEEN, Red Onion Prison; LT. FIELDS,
Wallens Ridge Prison; KISER, Asst. Warden, Wallens Ridge
Prison; SYKES, Unit Manager, Keen Mountain Correctional
Center; LT. OWENS, Keen Mountain Correctional Center;
OFFICER YATES, Keen Mountain Correctional Center; OFFICER
PHILIP, Keen Mountain Correctional Center; RYAN YATES,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge. (7:13-cv-00079-GEC-PMS)
Submitted: November 30, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, Appellant Pro Se. Nancy Hull
Davidson, Assistant Attorney General, Richard Carson Vorhis,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi appeals the district court’s
order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, entered
following a bench trial, to deny relief in Makdessi’s 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) action. We affirm the judgment.
“This [c]ourt reviews judgments stemming from a bench trial
under a mixed standard: factual findings are reviewed for clear
error, whereas conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.” Helton
v. AT & T, Inc., 709 F.3d 343, 350 (4th Cir. 2013). “[W]hen a
district court’s factual finding in a bench trial is based upon
assessments of witness credibility, such finding is deserving of
the highest degree of appellate deference.” Evergreen Int’l,
S.A. v. Norfolk Dredging Co., 531 F.3d 302, 308 (4th Cir. 2008)
(internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the trial
record confirms that there is no clear error in any of the
magistrate judge’s factual findings, which were wholesale
adopted by the district court, and that the district court did
not err in adopting the legal conclusions the magistrate judge
drew from these facts.
Accordingly, we affirm the entry of judgment in favor of
Defendants for the reasons stated by the district court in its
accompanying memorandum opinion. See Makdessi v. Ayers, No.
7:13-cv-00079-GEC-PMS (W.D. Va. July 2, 2015). We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
3
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
4