Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gazelle v. DeRobertis, 01-1028 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-1028 Visitors: 40
Filed: Jul. 19, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1028 DONNA GAZELLE; HARRY GAZELLE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus LEO DEROBERTIS, JR.; DICK SIMON TRUCKING, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees, and JOHN M. MCNEIL, JR.; SIMON TRANSPORTATION SER- VICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-98-336-1) Submitted: June 20, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1028 DONNA GAZELLE; HARRY GAZELLE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus LEO DEROBERTIS, JR.; DICK SIMON TRUCKING, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees, and JOHN M. MCNEIL, JR.; SIMON TRANSPORTATION SER- VICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-98-336-1) Submitted: June 20, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001 Before WIDENER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas R. Wolf, REMINGER & REMINGER CO., L.P.A., Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellants. David L. Yaussy, Brian R. Swiger, ROBINSON & MCELWEE, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donna and Harry Gazelle appeal the district court judgment enforcing a settlement agreement. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Gazelle v. DeRobertis, No. CA-98-336-1 (S.D.W. Va. Nov. 11, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately addressed 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