Summary
finding that plaintiff could raise due process claims relating to the removal of her children in her ongoing child custody proceedings in state family court
Summary of this case from Olshefsky v. BerganOpinion
No. 18-2012
01-22-2019
MONIQUE BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DSS; MENTAL HEALTH; LEXINGTON MEDICAL CENTER; LADAWN; MS. FOSTER; CRYSTAL HEYWARD, RCDSS; TINA KINSLER; JHANTE ROBBINS; AALIYAH SINGLETON; PINE GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOARD; RICHLAND COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; PALMETTO RICHLAND; METROPOLITAN CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY MAIN STREET; SONYA GOOD; MS. JETER; JUDGE JONES; ALIVIN WATSON; SUPERVISOR KIM GARVIN, Defendants - Appellees, and TINA KINSLER; PINE GROVE ELEMENTARY; JHANTE ROBBINS; RICHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT; MS. DINKY; MR. WILLIAMS; MS. BRADHAM; MS. WALTERS; AUBREY RAYMOND, RCSD; SCHOOL OFFICER HILLS; PALMETTO RICHLAND HOSPITAL; RICHLAND 1 SCHOOL BOARD; FOREST HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY; MAIN STREET 170; MS. JENNIFER JETER; SONYA GOOD; EE TAYLOR ELEMENTARY; MENTAL HEALTH DR. PETERS; COUNSELOR AKILAH; LATONYA JACKSON; NICOLE WILLIAMS; DSS TERRI THOMPSON; DSS SUPERVISOR KIMBERLY GARVIN, Defendants.
Monique Barnes, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (3:18-cv-01567-CMC) Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monique Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Monique Barnes appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barnes v. DSS, No. 3:18-cv-01567-CMC (D.S.C. Aug. 14, 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