Albert M. Hargrove v. DETLEF STEINER, Individually

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1736
ALBERT M. HARGROVE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DETLEF STEINER, Individually and
Professionally Clarendon National Insurance
Co.; MIDWESTERN INSURANCE ALLIANCE,
INCORPORATED; CATHY ANN NEW, Individually and
Professionally Midwestern Insurance Alliance,
Inc.; NORMAN E. RISEN, Individually and
Professionally Midwestern Insurance Alliance,
Inc.; BATTS TEMPORARY SERVICE, INCORPORATED,
d/b/a Labor Works Source, Incorporated;
CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY;
CLARENDON INSURANCE GROUP, INCORPORATED,
Clarendon National Insurance Co., Clarendon
America Insurance Co., Redland Insurance
Company, Harbor Speciality Insurance Co.;
HANNOVER LIFE REASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA;
HANNOVER RUCKVERSICHERUNGS-AKTIENGESELL-
SCHAFT, Clarendon National Insurance Company,
The Clarendon Group, Hannover Life Reassurance
Company of America; GEORGE GLENN, II, Deputy
Commissioner, Individual and Official
Capacity, and the N.C. Industrial Commission
by and through the N.C. Department of
Commerce; BUCK LATTIMORE, Official Capacity
and the N.C. Industrial Commission by and
through the N.C. Department of Commerce,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (CA-04-304-5-FL)

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
Submitted: November 30, 2005 Decided: January 4, 2006
Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert M. Hargrove, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Susan Jerzak,
HEDRICK, EATMAN, GARDNER AND KINCHELOE, Raleigh, North Carolina;
Perry Cleveland Henson, Jr., HENSON & HENSON, L.L.P., Greensboro,
North Carolina; Scarlette Kaye Gardner, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Albert M. Hargrove appeals (1) the district court’s June
3, 2005 order denying his motion for the issuance of a subpoena
duces tecum; and (2) the district court’s June 20, 2005 order
denying his motions for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b); to recall or stay the mandate; and to establish the
admission of contested and uncontested facts. We affirm all of the
district court’s orders. We further deny all of Hargrove’s pending
motions, including his motions to consolidate, motion for
appointment of counsel, motion to compel discovery, motion to
separate the documents within the briefs, motion to compel
arbitration or alternatively, to compel mediation, motion to
supplement the reply brief, and any other motions pending in this
appeal. 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

-- 3 of 3 --