Filed: Nov. 21, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1624 RITA COLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FOOD LION, LLC, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-04-653-2) Submitted: October 28, 2005 Decided: November 21, 2005 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward F. H
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1624 RITA COLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FOOD LION, LLC, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-04-653-2) Submitted: October 28, 2005 Decided: November 21, 2005 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward F. Ha..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1624
RITA COLE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
FOOD LION, LLC,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-04-653-2)
Submitted: October 28, 2005 Decided: November 21, 2005
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward F. Halloran, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellant.
Robert W. McFarland, Michael W. Lewis, MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Norfolk,
Virginia; William H. Baxter, II, MCGUIREWOODS LLP, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Rita Cole appeals the district court’s order granting the
Defendant’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion for summary judgment in this
diversity action. We review a grant of summary judgment de novo.
See Higgins v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.,
863 F.2d 1162, 1167
(4th Cir. 1988). A motion for summary judgment may be granted if
“there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and . . . the
moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.
R. Civ. P. 56(c). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Cole v. Food Lion, LLC, No. CA-04-653-2 (E.D.
Va. May 26, 2005). 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 -