Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gordon Gravelle v. Kaba Ilco Corp, 13-2167 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-2167 Visitors: 18
Filed: Mar. 21, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2167 GORDON GRAVELLE, o/a CodePro Manufacturing, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KABA ILCO CORP; CHUCK MURRAY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-cv-00160-FL) Submitted: March 7, 2014 Decided: March 21, 2014 Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublish
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2167 GORDON GRAVELLE, o/a CodePro Manufacturing, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KABA ILCO CORP; CHUCK MURRAY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-cv-00160-FL) Submitted: March 7, 2014 Decided: March 21, 2014 Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gordon Gravelle, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Kane Thies, BRYAN CAVE, LLP, San Francisco, California; Mark Vasco, BRYAN CAVE, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gordon Gravelle appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to vacate the final arbitration award and granting Defendants’ motion to confirm the same. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Gravelle leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gravelle v. Kaba Ilco Corp., 5:13-cv-00160-FL (E.D.N.C. Sept. 16, 2013). We also deny Gravelle’s motion for leave to supplement. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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