Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cluck-U, Corporation v. Kenneth Dougherty, 13-1521 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-1521 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1521 CLUCK-U, CORP., Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KEITH DOUGHERTY, on behalf of Docson Consulting LLC, Appellant, MICHAEL GHIGLIERI, Defendant – Appellant, and C.U.C. OF MARYLAND, INC.; KEN & JIM C.U.C., INC.; KENNETH A. BRADY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District Judge. (8:10-cv-02105-DKC) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: Aug
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1521 CLUCK-U, CORP., Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KEITH DOUGHERTY, on behalf of Docson Consulting LLC, Appellant, MICHAEL GHIGLIERI, Defendant – Appellant, and C.U.C. OF MARYLAND, INC.; KEN & JIM C.U.C., INC.; KENNETH A. BRADY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District Judge. (8:10-cv-02105-DKC) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 26, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Ghiglieri and Keith Dougherty, Appellants Pro Se. Richard Charles Daniels, DANIELS & DANIELS, LLC, College Park, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Keith Dougherty and Michael Ghiglieri appeal the district court’s order denying their Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4), (6) motion for relief from a state court judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cluck-U, Corp. v. Dougherty, No. 8:10-cv-02105-DKC (D. Md. Mar. 21, 2013). We deny as moot Appellants’ motion to adopt a brief filed in a Tenth Circuit case. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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