Filed: Jun. 06, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1295 ERIE INSURANCE PROPERTY & CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HARRY E. WALKUP, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-01-513) Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry E. Walkup
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1295 ERIE INSURANCE PROPERTY & CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HARRY E. WALKUP, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-01-513) Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry E. Walkup,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1295 ERIE INSURANCE PROPERTY & CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HARRY E. WALKUP, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-01-513) Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry E. Walkup, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Kermit J. Moore, BREWSTER, MORHOUS & CAMERON, Bluefield, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Harry E. Walkup, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment for Erie Insurance Property and Casualty Company in its civil action against Walkup. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Erie Ins. Property & Cas. Co. v. Walkup, No. CA-01-513 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 12, 2002). 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 2
