Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 20, 2016
Docket16-1212
StatusUnpublished

This text of Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp (Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp, (4th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1212

CALVIN EARL BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SEARS HOLDING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, d/b/a Kmart Corporation #7080; THOMAS M. COLCLOUGH, Director US EEOC, Raleigh Area Office; STEVE DOOLEY; RAJENONAKYMAR PATEL; JAYESH PATEL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (4:14-cv-00033-D)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Calvin Earl Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Paul S. Holscher, JACKSON LEWIS PC, Raleigh, North Carolina, David A. Hughes, JACKSON LEWIS PC, Atlanta, Georgia; Roberto Francisco Ramirez, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Calvin Earl Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying his second motion to reconsider the court’s earlier

order denying his civil action alleging employment

discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse

of discretion by the district court. See Werner v. Carbo, 731

F.2d 204, 206 (4th Cir. 1984) (noting review standard for Fed.

R. Civ. P. 60(b) denial). * Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed

in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

* Because Brown’s motion to reconsider was filed greater than 28 days after the district court’s order dismissing his civil action, the district court’s review was under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Werner v. Carbo
731 F.2d 204 (Fourth Circuit, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Calvin Brown v. Sears Holding Management Corp, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calvin-brown-v-sears-holding-management-corp-ca4-2016.