Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

82 F.3d 409

Docket No. 95-7917.

Burgess v. Evatt

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted March 21, 1996. Decided April 10, 1996.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-04-10

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Farley v. Wp Coal Company

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1996-04-10

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1334-10-21BD)

Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David Leon Morrison, ELLIS, LAWHORNE, DAVIDSON & SIMS, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his motion filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. We also find no abuse of discretion in the district court's denial of Appellant's Rule 59(e) motion. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Burgess v. Evatt, No. CA-94-1334-10-21BD (D.S.C. Aug. 7, 1995; Sept. 15, 1995). 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

/82/f3d/409 · .json · Public domain