Filed: Jul. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1511 TIMOTHY A. PLEDGER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, A Virginia Municipal Corporation, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-00-598-2) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1511 TIMOTHY A. PLEDGER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, A Virginia Municipal Corporation, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-00-598-2) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. T..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1511 TIMOTHY A. PLEDGER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, A Virginia Municipal Corporation, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-00-598-2) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timothy A. Pledger, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher Scott Boynton, Kimberly Rouse Essendelft, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Timothy A. Pledger appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Pledger v. City of Virginia, No. CA-00-598-2 (E.D. Va. Apr. 12, 2002). We deny Pledger leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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