Filed: Oct. 08, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1517 BARRY GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOMBARDIER CAPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-03-4070-3-22BD) Submitted: September 29, 2004 Decided: October 8, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry Green, J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1517 BARRY GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOMBARDIER CAPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-03-4070-3-22BD) Submitted: September 29, 2004 Decided: October 8, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry Green, Jr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1517 BARRY GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOMBARDIER CAPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-03-4070-3-22BD) Submitted: September 29, 2004 Decided: October 8, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan M. Milling, MCNAIR LAW FIRM, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Barry Green, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss this civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Green v. Bombardier Capital, No. CA-03-4070-3-22BD (D.S.C. filed Apr. 15, 2004; entered April 16, 2004). 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 -
