Clark Thomas v. Charleston County ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 21-6646
    CLARK D. THOMAS, a/k/a George K. Nichols,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    CHARLESTON COUNTY; WILLIAM J. AGOSTA; DESIREE R. ALLEN; JULIE
    J. ARMSTRONG; AXELROD & ASSOCIATES; STUART M. AXELROD; D.
    KEITH BOLUS; MICHAEL T. BOLUS; ORIN G. BRIGGS; JOCELYN B. CATE;
    CITY OF FOLLY BEACH; ADASHA L. CLARKE; LESLEY M. COGGIOLA;
    NICHOLE L. DENEANE; R. MARKLEY DENNIS; TIMOTHY M. GLOVER;
    KRISTY L. GOLDBERG; JAMES B. GOSNELL; DAVID G. GUYTON; KRISTI
    L. HARRINGTON; LAREE A. HENSLEY; SHARON D. JONES; WOLFGANG L.
    KELLY; LISA A. KINON; EDWARD L. KNISLEY, JR.; JUDY L. MCMAHON;
    CATHY L. MEREE; ANNE B. MEYER; J. C. NICHOLSON, JR.; KATRINA L.
    PATTON; JOSEPH K. QUALEY; GARY W. REINHART; JOYCE C. RUEGER;
    TRISTAN M. SHAFFER; JAMES W. SMILEY, IV; CHRISTOPHER L.
    TALBOTT; CECIL J. TERRY, JR.; SABRINA C. TODD; ROSE B. WALKER;
    NATHAN S. WILLIAMS; ASHLEIGH R. WILSON; SCARLETT A. WILSON;
    HENRY T. WOODS,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
    Charleston. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (2:17-cv-01958-MBS)
    Submitted: December 16, 2021                           Decided: December 17, 2021
    Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Clark D. Thomas, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Clark D. Thomas appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation
    of the magistrate judge and dismissing Thomas’ 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     complaint under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B) and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed
    the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
    the district court. Thomas v. Charleston Cnty., No. 2:17-cv-01958-MBS (D.S.C. filed Sept.
    15 & entered Sept. 17, 2020; Mar. 24, 2021). We deny Thomas’ motion to appoint counsel.
    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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-6646

Filed Date: 12/17/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/17/2021