Court Opinion

ID: 9365003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-20 21:00:34.663752+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:43.176412
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2097      Doc: 17         Filed: 01/19/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-2097

        RYAN BLAKE STEVENSON,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        LISA DAVIS CLARK, Family Court Judge; DEREK C. SWOPE, Circuit Court
        Judge; JULIE BALL, Circuit Clerk,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
        Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-00625)

        Submitted: January 17, 2023                                       Decided: January 19, 2023

        Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ryan Blake Stevenson, Appellant Pro Se. John P. Fuller, BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC,
        Charleston, West Virginia; Wendy Elizabeth Greve, PULLIN, FOWLER, FLANAGAN,
        BROWN & POE, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2097      Doc: 17        Filed: 01/19/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ryan Blake Stevenson appeals the district court’s order accepting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Stevenson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983

        complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

        affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stevenson v. Clark, No. 1:21-cv-00625

        (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 19, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

        contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                     AFFIRMED

                                                    2