Ronald Paul v. Paul de Holczer

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999668449-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-02178-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999748895]. Mailed to: Ronald Paul. [15-2059]

Appeal: 15-2059

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/04/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2059

RONALD I. PAUL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PAUL D. DE HOLCZER, individually and as a partner of the law
firm of Moses, Koon & Brackett, PC; MICHAEL H. QUINN,
individually and as senior lawyer of Quinn Law Firm, LLC; J.
CHARLES ORMOND, JR., individually and as partner of the Law
Firm of Holler, Dennis, Corbett, Ormond, Plante & Garner;
OSCAR K. RUCKER, in his individual capacity as Director,
Rights of Way South Carolina Department of Transportation;
MACIE M. GRESHAM, in her individual capacity as Eastern
Region
Right
of
Way
Program
Manager
South
Carolina
Department of Transportation; NATALIE J. MOORE, in her
individual capacity as Assistant Chief Counsel, South
Carolina Department of Transportation,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (3:15-cv-02178-CMC)

Submitted:

January 29, 2016

Decided:

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

February 4, 2016

Appeal: 15-2059

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/04/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Ronald I. Paul, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-2059

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/04/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ronald I. Paul appeals the district court’s order accepting
the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing

without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint * and the
order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend
the

judgment.

reversible error.

We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in

forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

Paul v. de Holczer, No. 3:15-cv-02178-CMC (D.S.C. July

28, 2015 & Sept. 2, 2015).

We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

*

We conclude we have jurisdiction over this appeal.
See
Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-25
(4th Cir. 2015) (providing standard).

3