Case Name: Curlee SHERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee; Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Department of Social Services, Defendant-Appellee; Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Department of Social Services Orangeburg County, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-06-18
Citations: 100 F. App'x 916
Docket Number: Nos. 04-1083, 04-1296, 04-1303
Parties: Curlee SHERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Department of Social Services, Defendant-Appellee. Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Department of Social Services Orangeburg County, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 100
Pages: 916–917

Head Matter:
Curlee SHERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Department of Social Services, Defendant-Appellee. Curlee Sherman, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Department of Social Services Orangeburg County, Defendant—Appellee.
Nos. 04-1083, 04-1296, 04-1303.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 28, 2004.
Decided June 18, 2004.
Curlee Sherman, Appellant pro se.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, Curlee Sherman appeals the district court's orders in No. 04-1083 and No. 04-1303 accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaints based on Eleventh Amendment immunity. In No. 04-1296, he appeals the district court's denial of his motion for transcripts relating to No. 04-1083. We have reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Sherman's motions for general relief and his appellate motion for transcripts, grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sherman v. Department Social Servs., No. CA-03-3794-5-24BC (D.S.C. Dec. 31, 2003; Feb. 24, 2004); No. CA-04 — 160-5 (D.S.C. Feb. 20, 2004). 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