Case Name: Michael A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, Unknown Defendant; Rueben Greenberg, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-22
Citations: 135 F. App'x 614
Docket Number: No. 04-7845
Parties: Michael A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, Unknown Defendant; Rueben Greenberg, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 135
Pages: 614–615

Head Matter:
Michael A. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, Unknown Defendant; Rueben Greenberg, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-7845.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 30, 2005.
Decided: June 22, 2005.
Michael A. White, Appellant pro se.
Eugene Patrick Corrigan, III, Grimball & Cabaniss, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Michael A. White appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See White v. Greenberg, No. CA-03-382-8-27 (D.S.C. Oct. 22, 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