UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1231

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, through its Florence branches of the NAACP; WILLIAM P. DIGGS; LARRY MCCUTCHEN; CALVIN THOMAS; CLARISSA W. ADKIN- SON; MADIE ROBINSON; FRANK GILBERT,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

and

DOROTHY HINES,

Plaintiff,

versus

THOMAS TRUITT, Dr., School District Superin- tendent; DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION OF FLORENCE; CARROLL PLAYER; GLEN ODOM; LAWRENCE ORR; MARIAM BALDWIN; DORIS LOCKHART; JOHN FLOYD; ANNA ROSE RAINWATER; RICHARD SOJOURNER,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

FLORENCE COUNTY ELECTION COMMISSION; J. MENDEL BROWN, as Members of the Florence County Election Commission; ETTAPHINE SCOTT, as Mem- bers of the Florence County Election Commis- sion; ANNETTE C. PORTERFIELD, as Members of the Florence County Election Commission; H. STEVEN DEBERRY, III, as Members of the Florence County Election Commission; CHARLES D. MCCOWEN, as Members of the Florence County Election Commission; ERANDA EVERETT; S. PORTER STEWART,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-1054-4-21)

Submitted: November 17, 1998 Decided: December 23, 1998

Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brenda Reddix-Smalls, Eleazer R. Carter, REDDIX-SMALLS & CARTER, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants. D. Laurence McIntosh, MCINTOSH & LEE, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

2 PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal the district court’s orders awarding them

attorneys’ fees and later granting reconsideration of the amount of

the award. They assert that the court abused its discretion in

calculating the fee awards at rates lower than the rates they

requested. We review a district court’s award of attorneys’ fees

for abuse of discretion. See Rum Creek Coal Sales, Inc. v. Caper-

ton,

, 174 (4th Cir. 1994). Because we find no abuse of

discretion in the district court’s award, we affirm the court’s

orders based upon the reasoning of the district court. See NAACP

v. Truitt, No. CA-95-1054-4-21 (D.C.S.C. Dec. 8, 1997 and Jan. 28,

1998). Having granted Appellees’ motion to submit this appeal on

the briefs without oral argument, we dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions of the parties are ade-

quately presented in the materials before the Court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3