Filed: May 26, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1187 ANNA M. CLAYTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES DICKENS; JEMKO TRANSPORT, INCORPORATED, Defendants – Appellees, and C&M FORWARDING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:08-cv-00592-gec-mfu) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 26, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1187 ANNA M. CLAYTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES DICKENS; JEMKO TRANSPORT, INCORPORATED, Defendants – Appellees, and C&M FORWARDING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:08-cv-00592-gec-mfu) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 26, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1187 ANNA M. CLAYTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES DICKENS; JEMKO TRANSPORT, INCORPORATED, Defendants – Appellees, and C&M FORWARDING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:08-cv-00592-gec-mfu) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 26, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anna M. Clayton, Appellant Pro Se. David Wayne Hearn, SANDS ANDERSON, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Anna M. Clayton appeals the district court’s order entering judgment for the Defendants on Clayton’s diversity action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Clayton’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm the judgment of the district court. Clayton v. Dickens, No. 7:08-cv-00592-gec-mfu (E.D. Va. Jan. 27, 2010). 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
