Ferguson v. Pinkney, No. 05-7176 (4th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7176 LARRY MICHAEL FERGUSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ANGELIA PINKNEY, Captain and Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) at Lee Correctional Institution; ANN HUGHES, Director of Program Services; CALVIN ANTHONY, Warden of Lee Correctional Institution; JONATHAN E. OZMINT, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (CA-04-1248-0) Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: February 1, 2006 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Michael Ferguson, Appellant Pro Se. Edgar Lloyd Willcox, II, WILLCOX, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry M. Ferguson appeals several of the district court s orders filed in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. Ferguson argues that the court erred in denying his motion to compel discovery and motion to reconsider the denial of the order, petition for mandamus, and motion for reconsideration of the denial of the petition, and motion for disqualification of Magistrate Judge Marchant. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Ferguson v. Pinkney, No. CA-04-1248-0 (D.S.C. filed Aug. 26 & entered Aug. 27, 2004, filed Oct. 22 & entered Oct. 26, 2004, filed Dec. 16 & entered Dec. 17, 2004, June 6, 2005, July 14, 2005). 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 - 2 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.