Case Name: Charles W. PENLAND, Sr.; Mary Penland, Wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG, South Carolina; State of South Carolina; Jerry Saad, Court Appointed Receiver; RMC Office of Spartanburg County, South Carolina; South Carolina Department of Revenue, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-11-25
Citations: 302 F. App'x 219
Docket Number: No. 08-1925
Parties: Charles W. PENLAND, Sr.; Mary Penland, Wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG, South Carolina; State of South Carolina; Jerry Saad, Court Appointed Receiver; RMC Office of Spartanburg County, South Carolina; South Carolina Department of Revenue, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 302
Pages: 219–219

Head Matter:
Charles W. PENLAND, Sr.; Mary Penland, Wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG, South Carolina; State of South Carolina; Jerry Saad, Court Appointed Receiver; RMC Office of Spartanburg County, South Carolina; South Carolina Department of Revenue, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-1925.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 20, 2008.
Decided: Nov. 25, 2008.
Charles W. Penland, Sr., and Mary Pen-land, Appellants Pro Se.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Charles W. Penland, Sr., and Mary Pen-land appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing their 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 Penland v. County of Spartanburg, No. 6:07-cv-03288-HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 13, 2008). 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.