Filed: Oct. 08, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1567 MARY JO WILHELMJ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NORWEST BANK NEBRASKA, N.A., Defendant - Appellee, and FIRST BANK, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-195-A) Submitted: September 28, 1999 Decided: October 8, 1999 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1567 MARY JO WILHELMJ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NORWEST BANK NEBRASKA, N.A., Defendant - Appellee, and FIRST BANK, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-195-A) Submitted: September 28, 1999 Decided: October 8, 1999 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1567
MARY JO WILHELMJ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NORWEST BANK NEBRASKA, N.A.,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
FIRST BANK,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-99-195-A)
Submitted: September 28, 1999 Decided: October 8, 1999
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Jo Wilhelmj, Appellant Pro Se. Keith Christian Phillips,
WATT, TIEDER & HOFFAR, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mary Jo Wilhelmj appeals the district court’s order dismissing
her civil diversity action against the Defendants. We have re-
viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Wilhelmj v. Norwest Bank Nebraska, N.A., No.
CA-99-195-A (E.D. Va. Apr. 5, 1999).* We dispense with oral argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre-
sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
*
Although the order from which Wilhelmj appeals was filed on
April 2, 1999, it was entered on the district court’s docket sheet
on April 5, 1999. April 5, 1999, is therefore the effective date
of the district court’s decision. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and
79(a); see also Wilson v. Murray,
806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir.
1986).
2