Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cartwright v. Dalkon Shield Trust, 96-2406 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-2406 Visitors: 8
Filed: May 02, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2406 CHRISTYL CARTWRIGHT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DALKON SHIELD CLAIMANTS TRUST, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-274) Submitted: April 15, 1997 Decided: May 2, 1997 Before RUSSELL, WIDENER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christyl Cartwright, Appella
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2406 CHRISTYL CARTWRIGHT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DALKON SHIELD CLAIMANTS TRUST, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-274) Submitted: April 15, 1997 Decided: May 2, 1997 Before RUSSELL, WIDENER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christyl Cartwright, Appellant Pro Se. Melody Gunter Foster, DALKON SHIELD CLAIMANTS TRUST, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Christyl Cartwright appeals the district court's order grant- ing Defendant's motion for summary judgment upon the finding that this personal injury action is barred by Virginia's two-year statute of limitations, Va. Code Ann. ยง 8.01-243(A) (Michie 1992). Cartwright's injury was sustained in 1975; she filed this action in 1996. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reason- ing of the district court. Cartwright v. Dalkon Shield Trust, No. CA-96-274 (E.D. Va. Sept. 6, 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 deci- sional 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