Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hilgeford v. National Union Fire Insurance, 09-1163 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1163 Visitors: 41
Filed: Jun. 23, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1163 MATTHEW J. HILGEFORD, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA; AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INCORPORATED (AIG); BANK OF AMERICA, NA, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-00669-JRS) Submitted: June 18, 2009 Decided: June 23, 2009 Before NIEMEYER an
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1163 MATTHEW J. HILGEFORD, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA; AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INCORPORATED (AIG); BANK OF AMERICA, NA, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-00669-JRS) Submitted: June 18, 2009 Decided: June 23, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. * Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew J. Hilgeford, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Barnes Delano, Jr., SANDS, ANDERSON, MARKS & MILLER, Richmond, Virginia; Megan Conway Rahman, TROUTMAN & SANDERS, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. * The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2006). PER CURIAM: Matthew J. Hilgeford appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss his several federal and state law claims against them. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Hilgeford v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, No. 3:08-cv-00669-JRS (E.D. Va. Feb. 6, 2009). 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