Filed: May 15, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2537 JACQUELINE REESE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 95-3487-S) Submitted: April 8, 1997 Decided: May 15, 1997 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacqueline Reese, Appellant Pro Se.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2537 JACQUELINE REESE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 95-3487-S) Submitted: April 8, 1997 Decided: May 15, 1997 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacqueline Reese, Appellant Pro Se. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2537 JACQUELINE REESE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 95-3487-S) Submitted: April 8, 1997 Decided: May 15, 1997 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacqueline Reese, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Lee VanGeison, ANDER- SON, COE & KING, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 Appellee in this diversity action alleging breach of a disability insurance contract. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Reese v. New York Life Ins. Co., No. CA-95-3487-S (D. Md., Sep. 24, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
