Filed: Dec. 19, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1602 STEVEN D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION; SMURFIT-STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-00-3714) Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 19, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1602 STEVEN D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION; SMURFIT-STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-00-3714) Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 19, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1602 STEVEN D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION; SMURFIT-STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-00-3714) Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 19, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mitchell Jerry Williams, HARRIS & GRAVES, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Curtis L. Ott, TURNER, PADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Steven D. Johnson appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions for summary judgment in this tort action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. Stone Container Corp., No. CA-00-3714 (D.S.C. Apr. 30, 2002). 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
