Gulden v. White

Fourth Circuit

Gulden v. White

46 F. App'x 214

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 24, 2002

DocketNo. 02-1675

StatusPublished

This text of 46 F. App'x 214 (Gulden v. White) 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

Gulden v. White, 46 F. App'x 214 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles A. Gulden appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Gulden v. White, No. CA-01-1519 (E.D.Va. May 7, 2002). 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.

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

PER CURIAM.

Charles A. Gulden appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Gulden v. White, No. CA-01-1519 (E.D.Va. May 7, 2002). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 F. App'x 214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gulden-v-white-ca4-2002.