Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Hockney v. PCS Phosphate Corporation, 09-1624 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1624 Visitors: 10
Filed: Dec. 01, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1624 GLENN I. HOCKNEY, Hyde County Citizen & Hyde County Citizens, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PCS PHOSPHATE CORPORATION; STEVEN A. BECKER, CEO & Plant Manager NC PCS Phosphate Corporation; THOMAS "TOM" RYAN, President NC PCS Phosphate Corporation, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (4:08-cv-00210
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1624 GLENN I. HOCKNEY, Hyde County Citizen & Hyde County Citizens, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PCS PHOSPHATE CORPORATION; STEVEN A. BECKER, CEO & Plant Manager NC PCS Phosphate Corporation; THOMAS "TOM" RYAN, President NC PCS Phosphate Corporation, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (4:08-cv-00210-BR) Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 1, 2009 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Glenn I. Hockney, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Glenn I. Hockney appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Hockney’s civil action for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hockney v. PCS Phosphate Corp., No. 4:08-cv-00210-BR E.D.N.C. May 21, 2009). We deny Hockney’s motion to provide relief and prevent serious wrong and motions to expedite. 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
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