Williams v. Newsweek Inc ( 1999 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7243
LIONELL ELIJAH WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NEWSWEEK, INCORPORATED; NATHAN MCCALL,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District
Judge. (CA-98-1130)
Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 29, 1999
Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lionell Elijah Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Taylor Baine,
Sherry A. Ingram, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, Washington, D.C., for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Lionell Elijah Williams appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his civil diversity action for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted and denying his motion for default
judgment against Defendant Nathan McCall. Williams filed this
action against Newsweek, Inc., and McCall alleging that they used
his picture in a Newsweek article without Williams’ consent and in
violation of Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-40 (Michie 1992). We have re-
viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Williams v. Newsweek, Inc., No. CA-98-1130
(Aug. 31, 1999).* 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
*
Although the district court’s order is signed and date
stamped on August 27, 1999, the district court’s records show that
it was entered on the docket sheet on August 31, 1999. Pursuant to
Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is
the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we
take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See
Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2