Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Smith v. Bridgestone Firestone Tire Company, 09-1222 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1222 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jul. 27, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1222 ADRIAN MARION SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BRIDGESTONE FIRESTONE TIRE COMPANY; FORD MOTOR COMPANY; DONNIE HOWARD, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (1:08-cv-03049-MBS) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 27, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affir
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1222 ADRIAN MARION SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BRIDGESTONE FIRESTONE TIRE COMPANY; FORD MOTOR COMPANY; DONNIE HOWARD, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (1:08-cv-03049-MBS) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 27, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adrian Marion Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Adrian Marion Smith appeals from the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice and for lack of jurisdiction his civil action filed against Bridgestone Firestone Tire Company, Ford Motor Company, and Donnie Howard. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Bridgestone Firestone Tire Co., No. 1:08-cv-03049-MBS (D.S.C. filed Feb. 18, 2009; entered Feb. 19, 2009). We deny Smith’s motion for transcripts at government expense and 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