Court Opinion

ID: 9960732
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-16 21:00:58.771802+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:52.040624
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6948      Doc: 19         Filed: 04/15/2024      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6948

        ERIC DAVIS,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        P. FREEMAN,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
        Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (4:23-cv-03590-MGL)

        Submitted: April 11, 2024                                          Decided: April 15, 2024

        Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Eric Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6948      Doc: 19         Filed: 04/15/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Eric Davis appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

        complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order by failing to

        complete a portion of the complaint form and failing to complete a summons form for the

        Defendant. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

        conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b);

        Attkisson v. Holder, 925 F.3d 606, 620, 625-27 (4th Cir. 2019), and affirm the district

        court’s order. Davis v. Freeman, No. 4:23-cv-03590-MGL (D.S.C. Sept. 11, 2023). We

        deny Davis’ motion to appoint counsel. 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

                                                     2