Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Mary Diggs v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., 18-1349 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-1349 Visitors: 20
Filed: Aug. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1349 MARY A. DIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP; WAL-MART STORES, INC., d/b/a Wal-Mart Supercenter #2565, a/k/a Wal-Mart, a/k/a Wal-Mart Store, a/k/a Wal-Mart Supercenter, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:17-cv-00026-NKM-RSB) Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1349 MARY A. DIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP; WAL-MART STORES, INC., d/b/a Wal-Mart Supercenter #2565, a/k/a Wal-Mart, a/k/a Wal-Mart Store, a/k/a Wal-Mart Supercenter, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:17-cv-00026-NKM-RSB) Submitted: August 23, 2018 Decided: August 27, 2018 Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary A. Diggs, Appellant Pro Se. Cathleen Kailani Memmer, Victor S. Skaff, III, GLENN ROBINSON CATHEY MEMMER & SKAFF PLC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mary A. Diggs appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, on Diggs’ civil suit based on diversity jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Diggs v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, No. 6:17-cv-00026-NKM-RSB (W.D. Va. Mar. 8, 2018). 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. DISMISSED 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