Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC

Fourth Circuit

Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC

618 F. App'x 177

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 14, 2015

DocketNo. 14-2372

StatusPublished

This text of 618 F. App'x 177 (Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC) 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

Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC, 618 F. App'x 177 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles Edward Houston, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions for summary judgment, denying Houston’s motion to file responses out of time, and granting sanctions against him for failing to ensure his client was present at his depositions and the order denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC, No. 9:13-cv-01352-SB (D.S.C. Nov. 14, 2014; Nov. 25, 2014). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Charles Edward Houston, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions for summary judgment, denying Houston’s motion to file responses out of time, and granting sanctions against him for failing to ensure his client was present at his depositions and the order denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Houston v. Berkeley Hall LLC, No. 9:13-cv-01352-SB (D.S.C. Nov. 14, 2014; Nov. 25, 2014). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

618 F. App'x 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-v-berkeley-hall-llc-ca4-2015.