Robert V. Hartnett, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying Hartnett’s motion for new trial, sustaining the jury’s verdict and damage award. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hartnett v. Glidden, No. CA-99-29-2-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 6, 2000). 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.