Roseboro v. Garrison, No. 75--1082

CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
Writing for the CourtBefore RUSSELL, FIELD and WIDENER; PER CURIAM
Citation528 F.2d 309
Decision Date15 October 1975
Docket NumberNo. 75--1082
PartiesRobert Louis ROSEBORO, Appellant, v. Sam P. GARRISON, individually and in his official capacity as Warden of Central Prison, Appellee.

Page 309

528 F.2d 309
Robert Louis ROSEBORO, Appellant,
v.
Sam P. GARRISON, individually and in his official capacity
as Warden of Central Prison, Appellee.
No. 75--1082.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Argued June 10, 1975.
Decided Oct. 15, 1975.

Jacob L. Safron, Asst. Atty. Gen., N.C. and (Rufus L. Edmisten, Atty. Gen., N.C., on brief) for appellee.

Roy T. Stuckey, Columbia, S.C. (Court-assigned counsel), for appellant.

Before RUSSELL, FIELD and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Louis Roseboro, an inmate of the Central Prison in Raleigh, North Carolina, instituted this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief as well as damages for alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The district court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and upon this appeal Roseboro contends that summary disposition of his case was improper.

Three of the allegations of Roseboro's pro se complaint were directed at his custody classification and consequent transfer from Polk Youth Center to Central Prison, and the remaining allegations challenge his segregation from the general prison population, the conduct of the prison guards and the failure to furnish him certain medical treatment. In support of his summary motion the defendant submitted his own affidavit, together with the affidavits of other members of the prison staff bearing upon the allegations of the complaint. Finding that the affidavits were in compliance with Rule 56(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and noting that the plaintiff had failed to file any counter-affidavit controverting those submitted by the defendant, the district court concluded that summary judgment was appropriate.

In Wooten v. Shook, 527, F.2d 976 (4 Cir. 1975), we stated that '(w)hile we do not hold that an evidentiary hearing is required in every case such as this, the district court should ordinarily require that a dismissal or summary motion be supported by affidavit or other material sufficiently demonstrating that there is no factual issue and that dismissal is appropriate as a matter of law.' In the present case, of course, the defendant has met this requirement and if this were an ordinary civil action the failure of Roseboro to file any counter-affidavit would warrant the entry of summary judgment. We agree with the plaintiff, however, that there is another side to the coin which requires that the plaintiff be advised of his right...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6455 practice notes
  • Russell v. Warden Prison, C/A No. 0:15-267-DCN-PJG
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 16, 2015
    ...(D.S.C.) for a Report and Recommendation on the respondent's motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 19.) Pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the court advised the petitioner of the summary judgment and dismissal procedures and the possible consequences if he faile......
  • Bros. of the Wheel M.C. Exec. Council, Inc. v. Mollohan, Civil Action No. 2:11–cv–00104.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
    • November 14, 2012
    ...to respond to the motion by August 5, 2011. ECF [909 F.Supp.2d 533]No. 18. This Order was issued pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir.1975), and included a citation to Roseboro itself. The defendant filed his response on August 5, 2011, ECF No. 19, and the plaintiff repli......
  • Field v. West Virginia, Civil Action No. 2:20-00147
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
    • December 16, 2020
    ...filed a Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Memorandum in Support. (Document Nos. 3 and 4.) Notice pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), was issued to Plaintiff on February 26, 2020, advising him of the right to file a response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (Docume......
  • Rumfelt v. Jazzie Pools Inc., 1:11cv217 (JCC/TCB)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • May 31, 2011
    ...2011, Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss.2 [Dkt. 5.] The Motion was accompanied by the proper notice required by Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975) and Local Rule 7(K). [Dkt. 5.] Plaintiff filed his opposition and a memorandum in support thereto on May 3, 2011. [Dkts. 15,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6455 cases
  • Russell v. Warden Prison, C/A No. 0:15-267-DCN-PJG
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 16, 2015
    ...(D.S.C.) for a Report and Recommendation on the respondent's motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 19.) Pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the court advised the petitioner of the summary judgment and dismissal procedures and the possible consequences if he faile......
  • Bros. of the Wheel M.C. Exec. Council, Inc. v. Mollohan, Civil Action No. 2:11–cv–00104.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
    • November 14, 2012
    ...to respond to the motion by August 5, 2011. ECF [909 F.Supp.2d 533]No. 18. This Order was issued pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir.1975), and included a citation to Roseboro itself. The defendant filed his response on August 5, 2011, ECF No. 19, and the plaintiff repli......
  • Field v. West Virginia, Civil Action No. 2:20-00147
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Southern District of West Virginia
    • December 16, 2020
    ...filed a Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Memorandum in Support. (Document Nos. 3 and 4.) Notice pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), was issued to Plaintiff on February 26, 2020, advising him of the right to file a response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (Docume......
  • Rumfelt v. Jazzie Pools Inc., 1:11cv217 (JCC/TCB)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • May 31, 2011
    ...2011, Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss.2 [Dkt. 5.] The Motion was accompanied by the proper notice required by Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975) and Local Rule 7(K). [Dkt. 5.] Plaintiff filed his opposition and a memorandum in support thereto on May 3, 2011. [Dkts. 15,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT