Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Stevens v. Holland, 00-1557 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-1557 Visitors: 37
Filed: Feb. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1557 NATHAN STEVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL H. HOLLAND, Chairman; MARTY D. HUDSON, Trustee; ELLIOT A. SEGAL, Trustee; JOSEPH H. STAHL, II, Trustee; UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (CA-99-54-1) Submitted: January 31, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before NIEME
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1557 NATHAN STEVENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL H. HOLLAND, Chairman; MARTY D. HUDSON, Trustee; ELLIOT A. SEGAL, Trustee; JOSEPH H. STAHL, II, Trustee; UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (CA-99-54-1) Submitted: January 31, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence L. Moise, III, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellant. Glenda S. Finch, Deputy General Counsel, Christopher F. Clarke, Assistant General Counsel, UMWA HEALTH & RETIREMENT FUNDS, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Nathan Stevens appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Trust. 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. Stevens v. Holland, No. CA-99-54-1 (W.D. Va. Apr. 4, 2000). 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