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)
24-6524•Destined C. M. D. George v. Sargent Neeley
24-6524Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 22, 2024
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6524
DESTINED C. M. D. GEORGE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SARGENT NEELEY; LIEUTENANT WILLIAMS; LIEUTENANT FLEMING;
UNIT MANAGER COLLINS; SERGEANT TAYLOR; MAJOR HALL; WARDEN
R. WHITE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:23-cv-00818-JPJ-PMS)
Submitted: November 19, 2024 Decided: November 22, 2024
Before QUATTLEBAUM, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Destined C. M. D. George, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Destined George appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c)(1). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
order. George v. Neeley, No. 7:23-cv-00818-JPJ-PMS (W.D. Va. May 9, 2024). However,
we modify the district court’s order to reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice. See
King v. Rubenstein, 825 F.3d 206, 225 (4th Cir. 2016). 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 AS MODIFIED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.