Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Judy v. WVU Bd of Governors, 04-1615 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1615 Visitors: 24
Filed: Dec. 29, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1615 THEODORE M. JUDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY BOARD OF GOVERNORS, a Public Entity, Defendant - Appellee, and FIDELITY NATIONAL COLLECTIONS, Division of Fidelity Properties, Incorporated; WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, INCORPORATED, a West Virginia Corporation and a Functional Operation Unit of West Virginia University Board of Governors, a Public Entity, Defendants. Appeal from the United
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1615 THEODORE M. JUDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY BOARD OF GOVERNORS, a Public Entity, Defendant - Appellee, and FIDELITY NATIONAL COLLECTIONS, Division of Fidelity Properties, Incorporated; WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, INCORPORATED, a West Virginia Corporation and a Functional Operation Unit of West Virginia University Board of Governors, a Public Entity, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-156-1) Submitted: November 30, 2004 Decided: December 29, 2004 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John R. Goodwin, Las Vegas, Nevada, for Appellant. William S. Adams, MACCORKLE, LAVENDER, CASEY & SWEENEY, P.L.L.C., Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Theodore M. Judy appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the West Virginia University Board of Governors and denying his motion for reconsideration in his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Judy v. Fid. Nat’l Collections, No. CA-02-156-1 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 7, 2003 & Apr. 14, 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 - 3 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer