Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Thompson v. Potter, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Rufus Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or set aside judgment under Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court denied Thompson's motion to place his case in abeyance and dispensed with oral argument, determining the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-10-16 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-1394

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Rufus Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or set aside judgment under Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court denied Thompson's motion to place his case in abeyance and dispensed with oral argument, determining the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Thompson v. Potter, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Rufus Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or set aside judgment under Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court denied Thompson's motion to place his case in abeyance and dispensed with oral argument, determining the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-1394

    RUFUS E. THOMPSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United
    States Postal Service,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District


    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    District Judge. (1:03-cv-00593-JAB)

    Submitted:

    September 25, 2006

    Court for the Middle


    James A. Beaty, Jr.,

    Decided:

    October 16, 2006

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Rufus E. Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Joan Brodish Binkley, OFFICE


    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Rufus E. Thompson appeals the district courts order
    denying Thompsons motion to vacate or set aside judgment pursuant
    to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6).

    We have reviewed the record and find

    no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated


    by the district court.

    Thompson v. Potter, No. 1:03-cv-00593-JAB

    (M.D.N.C. filed Feb. 23, 2006; entered Feb. 24, 2006).

    We deny

    Thompsons motion to place his case in abeyance.

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    are

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like