# Morris v. United States

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 1, 2013 · 520 F. App'x 205

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8451764

## Case

- **Full name:** Lonnie D. MORRIS v. UNITED STATES of America Federal Bureau of Prison Medical Department E. Borham, Health Care (Gilmer-FCI) Administrative Ellen Mace-Leibson, D.O. Clinical Director James A. Nolte, FNP Gilmer-F.C.I. John Doe Jane Doe Andrea Hall, RN Unknown
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 1, 2013
- **Citations:** 520 F. App'x 205
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Agee, Motz, Wilkinson
- **Cited by:** 3 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/8451764

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding plaintiff not excused from filing a 20 BROWN V. U.S. DEP’T OF JUSTICE, ET AL. 1:17CV144 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 60], OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS [DKT. NO. 63], AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE [DKT. NO. 1] certificate of meri…
- rejecting plaintiff’s claim that the alleged delay in treating his fracture fell within the exception of 55-7B-6(c) and noting “[a] court shall require expert testimony except where the ‘lack of care or want of skill is so gross, so as to be apparent, or the alleged breach rel…
- rejecting plaintiff’s claim that the alleged delay in treating his fracture fell within the exception of 55-7B-6(c

## Opinion text

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lonnie D. Morris appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge in part and dismissing his action filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and agree that Morris failed to comply with the requirements set forth in W. Va.Code Ann. § 55-7B-6 (LexisNexis 2008). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Morris v. United States, No. 3:12-cv-00073-GMG-DJJ, 2012 WL 6048936 (N.D.W.Va. Dec. 5, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be *206 fore this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8451764. Public record. Not legal advice.