Filed: Aug. 25, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1083 LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee, and EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:97-cv-01969-WDQ) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 25, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circui
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1083 LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee, and EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:97-cv-01969-WDQ) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 25, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1083 LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee, and EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:97-cv-01969-WDQ) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 25, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael N. Russo, Jr., COUNCIL, BARADEL, KOSMERL & NOLAN, PA, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion to reopen a civil action and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wilder v. Toyota Motor Credit Corp., No. 1:97-cv-01969-WDQ (D. Md. Dec. 4, 2007; Dec. 18, 2007). Wilder’s motion for appointment of counsel 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