Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Marc Goodman v. Praxair, Incorporated, 19-2450 (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-2450 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1440 MARC B. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRAXAIR, INCORPORATED; PRAXAIR SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cv-00391-MJG) Submitted: March 29, 2012 Decided: April 12, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 11-1440


MARC B. GOODMAN,

                Plaintiff - Appellant,

          v.

PRAXAIR, INCORPORATED; PRAXAIR SERVICES, INCORPORATED,

                Defendants - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.     Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District
Judge. (1:04-cv-00391-MJG)


Submitted:   March 29, 2012                 Decided:   April 12, 2012


Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Marc B. Goodman, Appellant Pro Se.       Amy Bess, VEDDER PRICE, PC,
Washington, D.C., for Appellees.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

           Marc   B.    Goodman    appeals   the   district     court’s    order

granting   partial     summary    judgment   for   Defendants,       the   jury’s

verdict in favor of Defendants, and the district court’s order

denying his post-judgment motion for judgment as a matter of law

in his breach of contract suit.           We have thoroughly reviewed the

record and find no reversible error.           Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court.                Goodman v. Praxair,

Inc., No. 1:04-cv-00391-MJG (D. Md. Apr. 2, 2008; Mar. 18, 2009;

Nov. 24, 2009; Mar. 30, 2011).            We find no basis to recuse the

district judge and accordingly deny Goodman’s motion that seeks

such relief.      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