Pierce v. City of Mullins Police Department
This text of 368 F. App'x 360 (Pierce v. City of Mullins Police Department) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Henry Pierce appeals the district court’s order denying as untimely his motion filed *361 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6), in which he sought a new trial on his excessive force claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pierce v. City of Mullins Police Dep’t, No. 4:00-cv-04004-TLW (D.S.C. Oct. 7, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
368 F. App'x 360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-city-of-mullins-police-department-ca4-2010.