Case Name: Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; Alice Schaaf, Human Service Specialist; Tiffany Bland; Dina Brazil; Jean Bradley; Irene Holman; B.J. Cook, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-06-29
Citations: 328 F. App'x 274
Docket Number: No. 09-1320
Parties: Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; Alice Schaaf, Human Service Specialist; Tiffany Bland; Dina Brazil; Jean Bradley; Irene Holman; B.J. Cook, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 274–275

Head Matter:
Willie Junior HINES, a/k/a Willie Hines, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SPARTANBURG COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; Alice Schaaf, Human Service Specialist; Tiffany Bland; Dina Brazil; Jean Bradley; Irene Holman; B.J. Cook, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-1320.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 22, 2009.
Decided: June 29, 2009.
Willie Junior Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Horner Colvin, Ronald H. Colvin Law Office, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Willie Junior Hines, a state prisoner, appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil action, which alleged that the Defendants negligently cared for his daughter while she was in the care and custody of the Department of Social Services. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hines v. Spartanburg County Dep't of Social Servs., No. 7:07-cv-03375-GRA, 2009 WL 237837 (D.S.C. Jan. 30, 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.