Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co.

Fourth Circuit

Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co.

670 F. App'x 776

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 21, 2016·No. No. 16-1674·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lynton Ballentine appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co., No. 3:15-cv-00496-FDW-DSC, 2016 WL 3095224 (W.D.N.C. June 1, 2016). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lynton Ballentine appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co., No. 3:15-cv-00496-FDW-DSC, 2016 WL 3095224 (W.D.N.C. June 1, 2016). 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

Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co., 670 F. App'x 776 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

670 F. App'x 776 (Ballentine v. James B. Nutter & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related