Case ID: f-appx_275/html/0246-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Esther FOSTER, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. RENFRO CORPORATION, Defendant— Appellee. Esther Foster, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Renfro Corporation, Defendant—Appellee.
    Nos. 07-1772, 08-1193.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 24, 2008.
    Decided: April 28, 2008.
    Esther Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Cara Yates Crotty, Constangy, Brooks & Smith, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Esther Foster appeals the district court’s denial of her motions to remand and to appoint counsel and the court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her civil complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Foster v. Renfro Corp., No. 7:07-cv-00124-HFF (D.S.C. May 2, 2007); 2008 WL 276510 (Jan. 29, 2008). We deny Foster’s motion to appoint counsel and deny as moot Renfro Corporation’s motion to dismiss. 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.