Filed: Sep. 30, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1516 DORATHEA PENDERGRASS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD F. LITTLEJOHN; PAUL YATES WHITMAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1224-6-21) Submitted: September 17, 1996 Decided: September 30, 1996 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1516 DORATHEA PENDERGRASS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD F. LITTLEJOHN; PAUL YATES WHITMAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1224-6-21) Submitted: September 17, 1996 Decided: September 30, 1996 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1516 DORATHEA PENDERGRASS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD F. LITTLEJOHN; PAUL YATES WHITMAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1224-6-21) Submitted: September 17, 1996 Decided: September 30, 1996 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dorathea Pendergrass, Appellant Pro Se. Frank Barron Grier, III, GRIER LAW FIRM, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying Appellant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 motion for a new trial. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. We deny Appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Pendergrass v. Littlejohn, No. CA-94-1224-6-21 (D.S.C. Feb. 15, 1996). 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
