Filed: Feb. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2425 H&W FRESH SEAFOODS, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS SCHULMAN, Defendant - Appellant, and SCOTT TAYLOR; HEWS SEAFOOD, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 98-3851-CCB) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed b
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2425 H&W FRESH SEAFOODS, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS SCHULMAN, Defendant - Appellant, and SCOTT TAYLOR; HEWS SEAFOOD, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 98-3851-CCB) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2425 H&W FRESH SEAFOODS, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS SCHULMAN, Defendant - Appellant, and SCOTT TAYLOR; HEWS SEAFOOD, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 98-3851-CCB) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lewis Schulman, Appellant Pro Se. John Stephen Simms, GREBER & SIMMS, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lewis Schulman appeals from the district court’s order de- clining to reconsider the denial of Schulman’s motion to vacate the default judgment entered against him. 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. H&W Fresh Seafoods, Inc. v. Schulman, No. CA-98-3851-CCB (D. Md. July 12, 2001). 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