Filed: Nov. 15, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1897 DELORES A. FRYE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PULTE CORPORATION; PULTE HOME CORPORATION, d/b/a Stoneridge Builders and Developers, Defendants - Appellees, and STONERIDGE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-905-A) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 15, 2001 Before
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1897 DELORES A. FRYE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PULTE CORPORATION; PULTE HOME CORPORATION, d/b/a Stoneridge Builders and Developers, Defendants - Appellees, and STONERIDGE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-905-A) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 15, 2001 Before ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1897 DELORES A. FRYE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PULTE CORPORATION; PULTE HOME CORPORATION, d/b/a Stoneridge Builders and Developers, Defendants - Appellees, and STONERIDGE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-905-A) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 15, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Delores A. Frye, Appellant Pro Se. Steven William Ray, Michelle B. Radcliffe, RAY & ISLER, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Delores A. Frye appeals from the district court’s order deny- ing her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. 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. Frye v. Pulte Corp., No. CA-00-905-A (E.D. Va. filed June 21, 2001; entered June 22, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2