Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Tinsley v. TRW, Incorporated, 96-2493 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-2493 Visitors: 22
Filed: Dec. 31, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2493 EDWARD G. TINSLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TRW, INCORPORATED; EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 96-273-PJM) Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: December 31, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2493 EDWARD G. TINSLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TRW, INCORPORATED; EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 96-273-PJM) Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: December 31, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward G. Tinsley, Appellant Pro Se. Sandy David Baron, GOLDSTEIN & BARON, CHARTERED, College Park, Maryland; Thomas Moss Wood, IV, Nathan Daniel Adler, NEUBERGER, QUINN, GIELEN, RUBIN & GIBBER, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on his action filed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C.A. ยง 1681 (West 1982 & Supp. 1996). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tinsley v. TRW, Inc., No. CA-96-273-PJM (D. Md. Sept. 30, 1996). 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