Paul M. Mcgowan, Plaintiff Appellant, v. T.e. Russell; J.b. Hummel; J.p. Inman; Mike Billips,magistrate; James C. Lanning, Defendants Appellees, 33 F.3d 52 (4th Cir. 1994)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, District Judge. (CA-92-391-3-P).
Paul M. McGowan, Appellant Pro Se.
Frank Bayard Aycock, III, Charlotte, N.C., and Jacob Leonard Safron, Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, N.C., for Appellees.
W.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before PHILLIPS, WILLIAMS and MOTZ, C.J.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying Appellant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the district court's order dismissing Appellant's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action for failure to comply with a discovery order. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* McGowan v. Russell, No. CA-92-391-3-P (W.D.N.C. Nov. 24, 1993). 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
We deny McGowan's request for appointment of counsel
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
