Opinion
No. 08-1925.
Submitted: November 20, 2008.
Decided: November 25, 2008.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03288-HMH).
Charles W. Penland, Sr., and Mary Penland, Appellants Pro Se.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Charles W. Penland, Sr., and Mary Penland appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Penland v. County of Spartanburg, No. 6:07-cv-03288-HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 13, 2008). 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.