Eric Childress v. M. Pettiford, No. 10-6216 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6216 ERIC CHILDRESS, Plaintiff Appellant, v. M. PETTIFORD, FCI Bennettsville Warden in his individual and official capacity; ASSISTANT WARDEN SMITH; ASSISTANT WARDEN MASACONI; DENISE BAWLING, Captain, in her individual and official capacity; D. SCHANTZ, SHU Lieutenant, in his individual and official capacity; L. MILLER, Lieutenant, in his individual and official capacity; D. MOORE, Lieutenant Sr. Officer, in his individual and official capacity; LUIS BERRIAS, Doctor, in his individual and official capacity; JULIA BERRIAS, Doctor, in her individual and official capacity; H. HANSEN, Nurse, in her individual and official capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CASH, in his individual and official capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER YOUNG, in his individual and official capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DOUGLAS, in his individual and official capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER JONES, in his individual and official capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CARTWRIGHT, in his individual and official capacity; J. STREEVAL, in his individual and official capacity; CASE MANAGER STREAMER, in his individual and official capacity; COUNSELOR LEWIS, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (4:08-cv-01001-SB) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 27, 2010 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric Childress, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Eric accepting the Childress appeals recommendation of the the district court s magistrate order judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (2006) complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Childress v. Pettiford, No. 4:08-cv-01001-SB (D.S.C. Jan. 27, 2010). oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials We dispense with legal before contentions the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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.
