Narrative Opinion Summary
John Roosevelt Baccus appeals the district court’s acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. After reviewing the record, the court finds no reversible error and affirms the district court's decision for the reasons provided in its ruling. The appeal case is Baccus v. Scott, No. 9:10-cv-02862-DCN, 2011 WL 3104129 (D.S.C. July 25, 2011). Baccus's motions to compel the district court clerk’s office for document copies, to obtain a transcript at government expense, to review the record, and to consolidate this appeal with case No. 11-7101 are denied. The court determines that oral argument is unnecessary as the facts and legal issues have been sufficiently articulated in the submitted materials. The ruling is AFFIRMED.
Legal Issues Addressed
Denial of Motions for Ancillary Reliefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's motions for document copies, a transcript at government expense, record review, and consolidation with another case were denied.
Reasoning: Baccus's motions to compel the district court clerk’s office for document copies, to obtain a transcript at government expense, to review the record, and to consolidate this appeal with case No. 11-7101 are denied.
Necessity of Oral Argumentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined oral argument was unnecessary as the submitted materials sufficiently articulated the facts and legal issues.
Reasoning: The court determines that oral argument is unnecessary as the facts and legal issues have been sufficiently articulated in the submitted materials.
Review of Magistrate Judge's Recommendationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief on the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint was upheld by the appellate court.
Reasoning: John Roosevelt Baccus appeals the district court’s acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.
Standard of Review for Reversible Errorsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's decision and thus affirmed the ruling.
Reasoning: After reviewing the record, the court finds no reversible error and affirms the district court's decision for the reasons provided in its ruling.