Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Brenda Davis

Filing 920100330

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1268 LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BRENDA J. DAVIS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:97-cv-02509-FNS) Submitted: March 12, 2010 Decided: March 30, 2010 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., appeals the district court's order denying his motion to reconsider the denial of his request to reopen a civil action that has been closed for ten years. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. See Heyman v. M.L. Mktg. Co., 116 F.3d 91, 94 (4th Accordingly, we deny Wilder's We dispense with contentions the court are and Cir. 1997) (providing standard). motion for appointment of counsel and affirm. oral argument because in the the facts and legal before adequately presented materials argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED Wilder filed a pro se notice of appeal outside of the appeal period, and we remanded to the district court to determine whether Wilder had demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the appeal period. See Wilder v. Davis, 298 F. App'x 225 (4th Cir. 2008) (No. 08-1268). The district court found Wilder demonstrated excusable neglect and therefore deemed the notice of appeal timely filed. Accordingly, we review the appeal on the merits. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?