Franklin Reaves v. Mark Richardson , 471 F. App'x 251 ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2339
FRANKLIN C. REAVES, Reverend, PhD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MARK RICHARDSON, Individually and in his official capacity
as Sheriff of Marion County; ALBERT WOODBURY, Individually
and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff of Marion
County; LEVON NICHOLS, Individually and in his official
capacity as Sheriff of Marion County; BOBBY L. CRAWFORD,
Individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff
of Marion County; TIM HARPER, Individually and as
Administrator of Marion County; WILLIE D. REAVES; CITY OF
MARION; TOWN OF SELLERS; HYBERT N. STRICKLAND, Individually
and in her official capacity; DONNA OWENS, Individually and
in her official capacity; C. SMITH, Individually and in his
official capacity as deputy sheriff of Marion County,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
SHERRY RHODES, individually and in her official capacity as
Marion County Clerk of Court; JERRY VINSON, Individually
and in his official capacity as Family Court Judge; MARION
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; MARION COUNTY JAIL; WILLIAM
YOUNG, Individually and in his official capacity as Family
Court Judge; LUVENIA WRIGHT, Mayor of Town of Sellers;
BOBBY GERALD, Mayor of City of Marion; SOUTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(4:09-cv-00820-TLW-SVH)
Submitted: April 19, 2012 Decided: April 24, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Franklin C. Reaves, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Thomas King,
WILLCOX BUYCK & WILLIAMS, PA, Florence, South Carolina; Douglas
Charles Baxter, RICHARDSON, PLOWDEN & ROBINSON, PA, Myrtle
Beach, South Carolina; Michelle Parsons Kelley, RICHARDSON,
PLOWDEN & ROBINSON, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Franklin C. Reaves appeals the district court’s order
denying his motions for a stay and to alter or amend the court’s
prior order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge
and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action*
and accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting the motions for attorney’s fees filed by several
Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Reaves v. Richardson, No. 4:09-cv-00820-TLW-SVH
(D.S.C. Nov. 3, 2011). 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
*
Because Reaves filed his motion for reconsideration of the
court’s order dismissing his § 1983 action within the
twenty-eight-day time limit for motions under Fed. R. Civ. P.
59(e), we treat the motion as a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or
amend judgment. Katyle v. Penn Nat’l Gaming, Inc., 637 F.3d
462, 471 n.4 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 115 (2011).
3