Summary
finding that verbal assault, standing alone, is not a cognizable injury in a § 1983 civil rights action
Summary of this case from Gallman v. G.C.D.C.Opinion
No. 07-6823.
Submitted: November 6, 2007.
Decided: November 21, 2007.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (6:06-cv-01633-GRA).
John Cooke Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel F. Arthur, III, Bradford Cary Andrews, Aiken, Bridges, Nunn, Elliott Tyler, PA, Florence, South Carolina; Benjamin Albert Baroody, Bellamy, Rutenburg, Copeland, Epps, Gravely Bowers, PA, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
John Cooke Wilson appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find that Wilson has failed to demonstrate that his injuries, if any, were not de minimus in nature. Wilson also alleges that one of the correctional officers used a racial slur while assaulting him. While the alleged statement was deplorable, mere threats or verbal abuse, without more, do not state a cognizable claim under § 1983. See Northington v. Jackson, 973 F.2d 1518, 1524 (10th Cir. 1992) (citing Collins v. Cundy, 603 F.2d 825, 827 (10th Cir. 1979)); see also Carter v. Morris, 164 F.3d 215, 219 n. 3 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wilson v. McKeller, No. 6:06-cv-01633-GRA (D.S.C. May 24, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.