From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rufus v. Seymour

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Feb 16, 2021
No. 20-7025 (4th Cir. Feb. 16, 2021)

Opinion

No. 20-7025

02-16-2021

MICHAEL ALONZA RUFUS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MARGARET B. SEYMOUR; KEVIN FRANK MCDONALD; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES; STATE BAR OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees.

Michael Alonza Rufus, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (6:20-cv-01394-MBS) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Alonza Rufus, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Michael Alonza Rufus appeals the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissing his action as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); United States v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 217 (1980); Haase v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 838 F.3d 665, 666-67 (5th Cir. 2016) (per curiam); Glick v. Edwards, 803 F.3d 505, 509 (9th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See Rufus v. Seymour, No. 6:20-cv-01394-MBS (D.S.C. June 30, 2020). 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


Summaries of

Rufus v. Seymour

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Feb 16, 2021
No. 20-7025 (4th Cir. Feb. 16, 2021)
Case details for

Rufus v. Seymour

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL ALONZA RUFUS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MARGARET B. SEYMOUR…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 16, 2021

Citations

No. 20-7025 (4th Cir. Feb. 16, 2021)

Citing Cases

Thomas v. United States

Thus, the undersigned recommends the court decline to automatically give Plaintiff leave to amend. See Rufus …

Thomas v. Jepertinger

As noted above, this action is also frivolous and subject to summary dismissal. See Rufus v. Seymour, 836…