Cunningham v. Drew

Fourth Circuit

Cunningham v. Drew

553 F. App'x 323

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 29, 2014·No. No. 13-7150·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Jerome Cunningham appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to void its earlier judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Wendt v. Leonard, 431 F.3d 410, 412-13 (4th Cir.2005) (providing standard in Rule 60(b)(4) action). Accordingly, we affirm the challenged order. 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Jerome Cunningham appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to void its earlier judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Wendt v. Leonard, 431 F.3d 410, 412-13 (4th Cir.2005) (providing standard in Rule 60(b)(4) action). Accordingly, we affirm the challenged order. 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.

Cunningham v. Drew, 553 F. App'x 323 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

553 F. App'x 323 (Cunningham v. Drew) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related