Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Gray v. Lee, 99-1799 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-1799 Visitors: 53
Filed: Oct. 26, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1799 ISAAC THOMAS GRAY, Administrator of the Estate of Debra Leigh Myers, deceased, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus Y. I. LEE, President of the Hyundai Motor America U.S. Headquarters; PARK WON-JIN, Vice- President and Chief Executive Officer of the Hyundai Motor America U.S. Headquarters; EDWARD J. SNYDER, President, Checkered Flag Hyundai; HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1799 ISAAC THOMAS GRAY, Administrator of the Estate of Debra Leigh Myers, deceased, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus Y. I. LEE, President of the Hyundai Motor America U.S. Headquarters; PARK WON-JIN, Vice- President and Chief Executive Officer of the Hyundai Motor America U.S. Headquarters; EDWARD J. SNYDER, President, Checkered Flag Hyundai; HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-99-275-2) Submitted: October 21, 1999 Decided: October 26, 1999 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Isaac Thomas Gray, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Joshua Cromwell, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, Norfolk, Virginia; Paul Granville Watson, IV, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, Richmond, Virginia; Randy Carl Sparks, Jr., HUFF, POOLE & MAHONEY, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Isaac Thomas Gray appeals the district court’s order dismiss- ing his civil action for lack of subject matter and diversity jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Gray v. Lee, No. CA-99- 275-2 (E.D. Va. May 21, 1999). 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