Lawson v. Spartanburg County Det ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-7934
    STEVEN P. LAWSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    SPARTANBURG   COUNTY    DETENTION  FACILITY;
    SPARTANBURG GENERAL HOSPITAL; DOCTOR BIANCA;
    JOHN DOE, Statutory Agent Officer; JANE DOE,
    Statutory Agent Officer,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
    (CA-02-3930-3-24BC)
    Submitted:   April 28, 2005                   Decided:   May 5, 2005
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Steven P. Lawson, Appellant Pro Se.         Steve Michael Pruitt,
    MCDONALD, PATRICK, TINSLEY, BAGGETT & POSTON, Greenwood, South
    Carolina; Perry D. Boulier, Stacey Campbell Davis, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR,
    GUNN & BRADFORD, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina; Stanley Turner
    Case, BUTLER, MEANS, EVINS & BROWNE, Spartanburg, South Carolina,
    for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Steven P. Lawson appeals the district court’s order
    denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider its earlier
    order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss his
    
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (2000) action.       We have reviewed the record and
    find no abuse of discretion.       Heyman v. M. L. Mktg. Co., 
    116 F.3d 91
    , 94 (4th Cir. 1997).     Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of
    the district court.    See Lawson v. Spartanburg County Detention
    Facility, No. CA-02-3930-3-24BC (D.S.C. Nov. 12, 2004).         Lawson’s
    motion to stay or remand this appeal is denied.          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
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-7934

Filed Date: 5/5/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021