Earl Wayne Odom v. Perry Martin

Fourth Circuit

Earl Wayne Odom v. Perry Martin

842 F.2d 1291, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3624, 1988 WL 25303

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 25, 1988

Docket87-6585

StatusUnpublished

This text of 842 F.2d 1291 (Earl Wayne Odom v. Perry Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Earl Wayne Odom v. Perry Martin, 842 F.2d 1291, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3624, 1988 WL 25303 (4th Cir. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

842 F.2d 1291
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Earl Wayne ODOM, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Perry MARTIN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87-6585.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 29, 1988.
Decided March 25, 1988.

Earl Wayne Odom, appellant pro se.

Jack Benjamin Crawley, Jr., for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, JAMES DICKSON PHILLIPS and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

A review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal from its order dismissing Odom's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the district court. Odom v. Martin, C/A No. 86-1294-CIV (E.D.N.C. July 27, 1987). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the materials before the court and oral argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

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

842 F.2d 1291
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Earl Wayne ODOM, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Perry MARTIN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87-6585.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 29, 1988.
Decided March 25, 1988.

Earl Wayne Odom, appellant pro se.

Jack Benjamin Crawley, Jr., for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, JAMES DICKSON PHILLIPS and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

A review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal from its order dismissing Odom's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the district court. Odom v. Martin, C/A No. 86-1294-CIV (E.D.N.C. July 27, 1987). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the materials before the court and oral argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

Occidental Chemical Corporation, E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Inc., Union Carbide Corp., Shell Chemical, Shell Oil Co., Asarco Incorporated, Ciba-Geigy Corp., Ciba-Geigy Limited, Velsicol Corp., Koopers Co. Inc., American Cyanamid Co., Uniroyal Inc., Hercules, Inc., Fmc Corp., Deskins,i.), Kline (B.), Barnes (J.), Diehl (K.), Fogle (S., M.), Savitski (K.), Warrington (B., G.), Morgan (T., L.), Clark (M.), Wagner (C., C.), Cookson (C.), Thompson (D., A.), McGee (M.), Gruss (J

842 F.2d 1291 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

842 F.2d 1291, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3624, 1988 WL 25303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/earl-wayne-odom-v-perry-martin-ca4-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack