Filed: Sep. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1635 CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LERNER CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-419-A) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 21, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles William Levy, App
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1635 CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LERNER CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-419-A) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 21, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles William Levy, Appe..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1635 CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LERNER CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-419-A) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 21, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles William Levy, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Charles William Levy appeals the district court’s order dismissing as frivolous his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Levy v. Lerner Corp., No. CA-04-419-A (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 16, 2004 & entered Apr. 20, 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 -
