Weldon Holtzclaw, Jr. v. Michael Pittman

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6949 Doc: 16 Filed: 04/28/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6949

WELDON EUGENE HOLTZCLAW, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL FLOYD PITTMAN, Estate of Michael Floyd Pittman; CAROLINA BATH & KITCHEN INC., d/b/a Dreammaker Bath & Kitchen; LYNN PITTMAN, Widow; LEE PRICKETT, Atty; LAW FIRM OF LEE PRICKETT; MELODIE LANE; RANDY HORNSBY; MARK CAIN; DOUG DWYER; ADVISORY TEAM OF DOUG DWYER; DREAMMAKER BATH AND KITCHEN CORPORATE; WORLDWIDE REFINISHING; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; S.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL; S. C. SECRETARY OF STATE; S.C. OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL; ATTORNEY PACE, of Bryan, Colette, Faris and Pace; LAW FIRM OF BRYAN, COLETTE, FARIS AND PACE; MARJORIE MORGAN; MELLISA SPIVEY, Spivey Law Group; RANDY SKINNER, Skinner Law Firm; JUDGE HELEN E. BURRIS, SC Bankruptcy Supreme Court Justice; JUDGE TIMOTHY MADDEN, Greenville County Family Court; LAW FIRM FOR DREAMMAKER CORPORATE, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (6:25-cv-00025-DCC)

Submitted: April 23, 2026 Decided: April 28, 2026

Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6949 Doc: 16 Filed: 04/28/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Weldon Eugene Holtzclaw, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6949 Doc: 16 Filed: 04/28/2026 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM: Weldon Eugene Holtzclaw, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his postjudgment motion to amend. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the court’s conclusion that Holtzclaw presented no grounds for relief. * Accordingly, we deny Holtzclaw’s pending appellate motions, and we affirm. 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

* We previously affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the complaint. See Holtzclaw v. Pittman, No. 25-1364, 2025 WL 2694384, at *1 (4th Cir. Sep. 22, 2025).