Case Name: James M. TENNANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEORGETOWN, City of, a Municipal Corporation; Paul Gardner; Ann Mercer; Cindy Howard; Brendon M. Barber, Sr.; Jack M. Scoville, Jr., in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees, and Douglas Charles Baxter, in his individual capacity, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-03-19
Citations: 597 F. App'x 752
Docket Number: No. 14-2131
Parties: James M. TENNANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEORGETOWN, City of, a Municipal Corporation; Paul Gardner; Ann Mercer; Cindy Howard; Brendon M. Barber, Sr.; Jack M. Scoville, Jr., in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees, and Douglas Charles Baxter, in his individual capacity, Defendant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 597
Pages: 752–753

Head Matter:
James M. TENNANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEORGETOWN, City of, a Municipal Corporation; Paul Gardner; Ann Mercer; Cindy Howard; Brendon M. Barber, Sr.; Jack M. Scoville, Jr., in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees, and Douglas Charles Baxter, in his individual capacity, Defendant.
No. 14-2131.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 17, 2015.
Decided: March 19, 2015.
James M. Tennant, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Charles Baxter, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Michelle Parsons Kelley, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James M. Tennant appeals the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Tennant's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint, and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Tennant v. City of Georgetown, No. 2:12-cv-00370-RMG, 2014 WL 4101209 (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 2014 & Sept. 19, 2014). 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.