Price v. McCormack
Opinion
Willie James Price appeals the district court’s order denying a motion to reinstate a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action that the district court dismissed in 2001 for failure to state a claim. * The district court construed the motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) and denied it. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Price v. McCormack, No. CA-01-1212-A (E.D.Va. Mar. 12, 2003). We also affirm the magistrate judge’s order awarding sanctions to the Defendants. 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.
Although Valerie Young was an original party to this case in the district court, only Willie James Price has pursued this appeal.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Willie James PRICE, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Valerie Young, Plaintiff, v. Ronald C. McCORMACK, Attorney; Edward F. Holloran, Attorney; Russell D. Knight; George Milleson, Defendants-Appellees, Stafford County, Movant
- Status
- Unpublished