Opinion
No. 20-2199
05-24-2021
MICHAEL E. TACCINO, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MINERAL COUNTY COMMISSION; MINERAL COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES; RIDGELEY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT.; TOWN OF RIDGELEY, Defendants - Appellees.
Michael E. Taccino, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. James William Marshall, III, BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; Margaret Miner, LINKOUS LAW, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:20-cv-00001-GMG-RWT) Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael E. Taccino, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. James William Marshall, III, BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; Margaret Miner, LINKOUS LAW, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Michael E. Taccino, Sr., appeals the district court's order dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, as well as the court's order denying Taccino's Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record de novo and identified no error in the district court granting Defendants' Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss. See Mays v. Sprinkle, 992 F.3d 295, 299 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review for a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal). Nor do we discern any abuse of discretion in the court's denial of Taccino's Rule 59(e) motion. See Wojcicki v. SCANA/SCE&G, 947 F.3d 240, 246 (4th Cir. 2020) (stating standard of review). We therefore affirm the district court's orders. Taccino v. Mineral Cnty. Comm'n, No. 3:20-cv-00001-GMG-RWT (N.D.W. Va. May 29, 2020 & Oct. 7, 2020). We deny Taccino's motion for oral argument and 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