The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
18-1593•Richard B. Lamb v. State of South Carolina Dmv Office
18-1593Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 17, 2018
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1593
RICHARD B. LAMB,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA DMV OFFICE; SFAA INSURANCE RESERVE
FUND; KEVIN SHWEDO; WILLIAM C. WANNAMAKER; MARCIA ADAMS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
Hill. David C. Norton, District Judge. (0:18-cv-00552-DCN)
Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard B. Lamb, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Richard B. Lamb appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation
of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Lamb v. SC Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, No. 0:18-cv-
00552-DCN (D.S.C. Apr. 24, 2018). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.