The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-6508•Arthur Lee Tillman v. STEPHEN M. DEWALT, Warden, FCI Butner
02-6508Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 28, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6508
ARTHUR LEE TILLMAN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
STEPHEN M. DEWALT, Warden, FCI Butner; JOHN
ASHCROFT, US Attorney General,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Joseph C. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-01-937-5-HO)
Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 28, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur Lee Tillman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Lee Tillman appeals the district court’s order denying
his motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). 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. See
Tillman v. Dewalt, No. CA-01-937-5-HO (E.D.N.C. filed Feb. 19,
2002, entered Feb. 20, 2002). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.