Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey W. JOHNSTON, Defendant-Appellant, v. Annuity Board of the Southern Baptist Convention; Marsh @ Worksolutions; Farmers New World Life Insurance Company, Parties in Interest
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-03-16
Citations: 123 F. App'x 128
Docket Number: No. 04-4479
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey W. JOHNSTON, Defendant-Appellant, v. Annuity Board of the Southern Baptist Convention; Marsh @ Worksolutions; Farmers New World Life Insurance Company, Parties in Interest.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 123
Pages: 128–129

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey W. JOHNSTON, Defendant-Appellant, v. Annuity Board of the Southern Baptist Convention; Marsh @ Worksolutions; Farmers New World Life Insurance Company, Parties in Interest.
No. 04-4479.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 18, 2005.
Decided: March 16, 2005.
James H. Babb, Howie & Babb, L.L.P., Sumter, South Carolina, for Appellant.
J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Christie Newman, Susan Z. Hitt, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey W. Johnston appeals from the district court's garnishment disposition order granting the Government's writs of continuing garnishment and denying Johnston's motion to quash writs, and from the subsequent denial of his motion to reconsider, alter, and amend the garnishment disposition order. We find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Johnston, No. CR-01-132 (D.S.C. May 3 & June 10, 2004). 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