Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hamilton v. Pilgrims Pride Corp, 04-1421 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1421 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 17, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1421 CHARLES K. HAMILTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-9-2) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 17, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1421 CHARLES K. HAMILTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-9-2) Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 17, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles K. Hamilton, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Leroy Fitch, Thomas Edward Ullrich, WHARTON, ALDHIZER & WEAVER, Harrisonburg, Virginia. Peter Gregory Zurbuch, BUSCH & TALBOTT, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Charles K. Hamilton appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment on his complaint alleging excessive exposure to carbon monoxide. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hamilton v. Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., No. CA-03-9-2 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 29, 2004). 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