Thurman Lilly v. Harvey Knox
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
THURMAN VAN LILLY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HARVEY KNOX; JOHN ALLEN; TRACY LEWIS; LANE CRIBB; MATTHEW J. MODICA; LINDA CANTEEN; TARA S. TAGGART, Defendants Appellees, and ISAAC PYATT, Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (2:06-cv-01138-JFA)
February 3, 2009
February 25, 2009
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thurman Van Lilly, Appellant Pro Se. Jerome Scott Kozacki, WILLCOX, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Thurman Van Lilly appeals the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2000) complaint. * reversible error.
We have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated Lilly v. Knox, No. 2:06-cv-01138-JFA We dispense with oral argument because
by the district court. (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2008).
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process. AFFIRMED
Although Lilly's notice of appeal refers to the district court's original judgment, the order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion, and the order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, it is timely only as to the denial of Rule 60(b) relief. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1).
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?