Case Name: Albert Charles BURGESS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blake E. TAYLOR, Jr.; Jotte Scarborough, individually and in their official capacities as employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC), Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-06-25
Citations: 67 F. App'x 820
Docket Number: No. 03-6542
Parties: Albert Charles BURGESS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blake E. TAYLOR, Jr.; Jotte Scarborough, individually and in their official capacities as employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC), Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 67
Pages: 820–821

Head Matter:
Albert Charles BURGESS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blake E. TAYLOR, Jr.; Jotte Scarborough, individually and in their official capacities as employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC), Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-6542.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 19, 2003.
Decided June 25, 2003.
Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David Leon Morrison, Davidson, Morrison & Lindemann, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., 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 Burgess v. Taylor, No. CA-02-1090-8-22 (D.S.C. Mar. 21, 2003). 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.