Case Name: Robert Lee FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry W. POWERS, Director of Spartanburg County Jail; Tony Fisher, Director of Spartanburg City Police Department; Officer Hall; K.D. Swad; Brad James, Defendants-Appellees, and Officer Booken, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-08-05
Citations: 339 F. App'x 355
Docket Number: No. 09-6354
Parties: Robert Lee FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry W. POWERS, Director of Spartanburg County Jail; Tony Fisher, Director of Spartanburg City Police Department; Officer Hall; K.D. Swad; Brad James, Defendants-Appellees, and Officer Booken, Defendant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 339
Pages: 355–355

Head Matter:
Robert Lee FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry W. POWERS, Director of Spartanburg County Jail; Tony Fisher, Director of Spartanburg City Police Department; Officer Hall; K.D. Swad; Brad James, Defendants-Appellees, and Officer Booken, Defendant.
No. 09-6354.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 30, 2009.
Decided: Aug. 5, 2009.
Robert Lee Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Todd Darwin, Holcombe, Bomar, Gunn & Bradford, PA, Spartanburg, South Carolina; James Dean Jolly, Jr., Logan, Jolly & Smith, LLP, Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Robert Lee Foster appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Foster's motions for appointment of counsel and for a preliminary injunction, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Foster v. Powers, No. 3:08-cv-00025-PMD, 2009 WL 349165 (D.S.C. Feb. 11, 2009). 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.