From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Dais

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Aug 3, 2010
389 F. App'x 222 (4th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 10-6612.

Submitted: July 22, 2010.

Decided: August 3, 2010.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:03-cv-00386-TLW-1).

Norman Tyrone Dais, Appellant Pro Se. Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Norman Tyrone Dais appeals the district court's order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(3) motion based on allegations of fraud, misrepresentation and misconduct. We have reviewed the record and find Dais did not establish misconduct by clear and convincing evidence or show that he was prevented from presenting his case. See Schultz v. Butcher, 24 F.3d 626, 630 (4th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, we find the court did not abuse its discretion denying the motion. Id. We affirm the court's order. 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.


Summaries of

United States v. Dais

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Aug 3, 2010
389 F. App'x 222 (4th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

United States v. Dais

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Norman Tyrone DAIS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Aug 3, 2010

Citations

389 F. App'x 222 (4th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Rahmi v. Sovereign Bank, N.A.

Therefore, Plaintiff "did not establish misconduct by clear and convincing evidence or show that he was…