# Brown v. Olivencia-Font

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 20, 2006 · 206 F. App'x 301

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021097

## Case

- **Full name:** Jerry BROWN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. L. OLIVENCIA-FONT, Doctor at Lieber Correctional Institution; Edsel T. Taylor, MacDougall Warden; South Carolina Department of Corrections, Defendants—Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 20, 2006
- **Citations:** 206 F. App'x 301
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Widener, Wilkinson, Motz
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021097

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6491

JERRY BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

L. OLIVENCIA-FONT, Doctor at Lieber
Correctional Institution; EDSEL T. TAYLOR,
MacDougall Warden; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (9:05-cv-01615-HMH)

Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 20, 2006

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Anne Turner Jett, NESS, JETT
& TANNER, Bamberg, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Jerry Brown 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 deny Brown’s motion

for a temporary restraining order and affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Brown v. Olivencia-Font, No. 9:05-cv-01615-

HMH (D.S.C. Mar. 1, 2006). 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

- 2 -

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021097. Public record. Not legal advice.