The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1231
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF
COLORED PEOPLE, through its Florence branches
of the NAACP; WILLIAM P. DIGGS; LARRY
MCCUTCHEN; CALVIN THOMAS; CLARISSA W. ADKIN-
SON; MADIE ROBINSON; FRANK GILBERT,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
and
DOROTHY HINES,
Plaintiff,
versus
THOMAS TRUITT, Dr., School District Superin-
tendent; DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION OF
FLORENCE; CARROLL PLAYER; GLEN ODOM; LAWRENCE
ORR; MARIAM BALDWIN; DORIS LOCKHART; JOHN
FLOYD; ANNA ROSE RAINWATER; RICHARD SOJOURNER,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
FLORENCE COUNTY ELECTION COMMISSION; J. MENDEL
BROWN, as Members of the Florence County
Election Commission; ETTAPHINE SCOTT, as Mem-
bers of the Florence County Election Commis-
sion; ANNETTE C. PORTERFIELD, as Members of
the Florence County Election Commission; H.
STEVEN DEBERRY, III, as Members of the
Florence County Election Commission; CHARLES
D. MCCOWEN, as Members of the Florence County
Election Commission; ERANDA EVERETT; S. PORTER
STEWART,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. William B. Traxler, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-95-1054-4-21)
Submitted: November 17, 1998 Decided: December 23, 1998
Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brenda Reddix-Smalls, Eleazer R. Carter, REDDIX-SMALLS & CARTER,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants. D. Laurence McIntosh,
MCINTOSH & LEE, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
Appellants appeal the district court’s orders awarding them
attorneys’ fees and later granting reconsideration of the amount of
the award. They assert that the court abused its discretion in
calculating the fee awards at rates lower than the rates they
requested. We review a district court’s award of attorneys’ fees
for abuse of discretion. See Rum Creek Coal Sales, Inc. v. Caper-
ton, 31 F.3d 169, 174 (4th Cir. 1994). Because we find no abuse of
discretion in the district court’s award, we affirm the court’s
orders based upon the reasoning of the district court. See NAACP
v. Truitt, No. CA-95-1054-4-21 (D.C.S.C. Dec. 8, 1997 and Jan. 28,
1998). Having granted Appellees’ motion to submit this appeal on
the briefs without oral argument, we dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions of the parties are ade-
quately presented in the materials before the Court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3