Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02146/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02146-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2146

RONALD I. PAUL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; PAUL D. DE 

HOLCZER, individually and as a partner of the law firm of 

Moses, Koon & Brackett, PC; G. L. BUCKLES, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of Keith J. Buckles and G. L. 

Buckles individually personal representative Keith J. 

Buckles; MICHAEL H. QUINN, Individually and as senior lawyer 

of Quinn Law Firm, LLC; J. CHARLES ORMOND, JR., individually 

and as partner of the Law Firm of Holler, Dennis, Corbett, 

Ormond, Plante & Garner; OSCAR K. RUCKER, in his individual 

capacity as Director, Rights of Way South Carolina 

Department of Transportation; MACIE M. GRESHAM, in her 

individual capacity as Eastern Region Right of Way Program 

Manager South Carolina Department of Transportation; NATALIE 

J. MOORE, in her individual capacity as Assistant Chief 

Counsel, South Carolina Department of Transportation; LIENE 

A. BUCKLES, as Personal Representative of the Estate of G.L. 

Buckles individually and Liene A. Buckles individually; 

REGINALD I. LLOYD, in his individual capacity as Circuit 

Court Judge, Richland County Court of Common Pleas 5th 

Circuit,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior

District Judge. (3:13-cv-01852-CMC)

Submitted: February 27, 2015 Decided: April 8, 2015

Appeal: 14-2146 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/08/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald I. Paul, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-2146 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/08/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Ronald I. Paul appeals the district court’s orders adopting 

the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action without prejudice, and denying his 

motion to reconsider and amend. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Paul v. S.C. Dep’t of Transp., No. 3:13-cv01852-CMC (D.S.C. Oct. 8 & 22, 2014). We deny Paul’s motion for 

summary reversal. 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

Appeal: 14-2146 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/08/2015 Pg: 3 of 3