Thomas Moyler, Jr. v. D. Williams, No. 21-6939 (4th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-6939 THOMAS MOYLER, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER D. WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellee, and KISER, Warden; SERGEANT J. R. MASSINGILL; D. BALL; J. B. MESSER, Grievance Coordinator; INVESTIGATOR FANNIN; UNIT MANAGER DUNCAN, A-Building; HAROLD CLARKE; SCARBERRY, Food Staff Supervisor; DAVID A. ROBINSON; LINDA SHEAR; MELISSA WELCH, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Robert Stewart Ballou, Magistrate Judge. (7:19-cv-00262-RSB) Submitted: November 18, 2022 Decided: February 2, 2023 Before WYNN and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Moyler, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Thomas Moyler, Jr., appeals the magistrate judge’s judgment in favor of Nathaniel Williams after a bench trial on Moyler’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive force claim. * “Following a bench trial, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo.” Wards Corner Beauty Acad. v. Nat’l Accrediting Comm’n of Career Arts & Scis., 922 F.3d 568, 573 (4th Cir. 2019). We have reviewed the magistrate judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge at the close of the bench trial conducted on June 8, 2021. Moyler v. Williams, No. 7:19-cv-00262-RSB (W.D. Va. June 14, 2021). 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 * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. 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.