U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2015

Glenn Henderson v. David Mckenzie

Glenn Henderson v. David Mckenzie
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 27, 2015

Glenn Henderson v. David Mckenzie

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2269

GLENN HENDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DAVID LOAR MCKENZIE; SONY PICTURES ENTERTAINMENT; KIM RUSSO; SCHMID & VOILES; KATHLEEN MCCOLGAN, Esq.; ROSEN & SABA, LLP; JAMES ROSEN, Esq.; ADELA CARRASCO, Esq., Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:14-cv-00029-FL)

Submitted: April 23, 2015 Decided: April 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Glenn Henderson, Appellant Pro Se. David Loar Mckenzie, SANDS ANDERSON PC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Glenn Henderson appeals the district court’s orders imposing a pre-filing injunction and denying Henderson’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that order. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the pre-filing injunction. See Cromer v. Kraft Foods N.A., Inc., 390 F.3d 812, 817-18 (4th Cir. 2004) (setting forth standard of review and four factors used to evaluate propriety of a pre-filing injunction). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Henderson v. Mckenzie, No. 5:14-cv-00029-FL (E.D.N.C. Oct. 2 & Oct. 29, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.