# Orlando Brown v. Richland County Sheriff's Dep't

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · January 27, 2014

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2651225

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 27, 2014
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **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/2651225

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2224

ORLANDO BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior
District Judge. (3:12-cv-03062-MBS)

Submitted: January 23, 2014 Decided: January 27, 2014

Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Orlando Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Robert David Garfield, Andrew
Lindemann, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Orlando Brown 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 affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Brown v. Richland Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, No. 3:12-cv-03062-MBS

(D.S.C. Sept. 13, 2013). 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2651225. Public record. Not legal advice.