Filed: Sep. 14, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1207 SAMUEL DAVIS PRIDGEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION; KEITH FULLER; WRENN BULLOCK; MIKE REGISTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-102-7-F(1)) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1207 SAMUEL DAVIS PRIDGEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION; KEITH FULLER; WRENN BULLOCK; MIKE REGISTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-102-7-F(1)) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. A..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1207 SAMUEL DAVIS PRIDGEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION; KEITH FULLER; WRENN BULLOCK; MIKE REGISTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-102-7-F(1)) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel Davis Pridgen, Appellant Pro Se. Randall David Avram, Richard David Haygood, KILPATRICK STOCKTON, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Samuel Davis Pridgen appeals the magistrate judge’s order awarding attorney’s fees and costs to Appellees.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge in his order. See Pridgen v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. CA-03-102-7-F(1) (E.D.N.C. Jan. 16, 2004). 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 * Pridgen did not timely appeal the district court’s final order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellees. - 2 -