Filed: Aug. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2160 REGINALD D. EVANS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LOUIS CALDERA, Secretary to the United States Army, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-97-3732-3-17BC) Submitted: July 30, 2002 Decided: August 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2160 REGINALD D. EVANS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LOUIS CALDERA, Secretary to the United States Army, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-97-3732-3-17BC) Submitted: July 30, 2002 Decided: August 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2160 REGINALD D. EVANS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LOUIS CALDERA, Secretary to the United States Army, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-97-3732-3-17BC) Submitted: July 30, 2002 Decided: August 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald D. Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Reginald D. Evans appeals the district court’s order setting aside the jury’s verdict and granting Appellee’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) motion. 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 Evans v. Caldera, No. CA-97- 3732-3-17BC (D.S.C. Sept. 18, 2001). 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
