Johnson v. Pep Boys—Manny

Fourth Circuit

Johnson v. Pep Boys—Manny

70 F. App'x 697

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 23, 2003

DocketNo. 02-2258

StatusPublished

This text of 70 F. App'x 697 (Johnson v. Pep Boys—Manny) 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

Johnson v. Pep Boys—Manny, 70 F. App'x 697 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Benjamin A. Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action on res judicata and statute of limitations grounds. We have independently reviewed the record and find no error in the district court’s dismissal. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Johnson v. Pep Boys, No. CA-02-381-2 (E.D.Va. Oct. 23, 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:

Benjamin A. Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action on res judicata and statute of limitations grounds. We have independently reviewed the record and find no error in the district court’s dismissal. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Johnson v. Pep Boys, No. CA-02-381-2 (E.D.Va. Oct. 23, 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)

70 F. App'x 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-pep-boysmanny-ca4-2003.