Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership

Fourth Circuit

Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership

521 F. App'x 203

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 2013

DocketNo. 12-2527

StatusPublished

This text of 521 F. App'x 203 (Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership) 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

Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership, 521 F. App'x 203 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Vicki A. Lindsey appeals from the district court’s orders denying her three separate Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motions seeking reconsideration of the district court’s order granting summary judgment for the Defendants in her action alleging premises liability and negligent application of a banned substance. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. P’ship, No. 3:ll-cv-00447-HEH-DJN (E.D.Va. Dec. 5, 2012, Jan. 3, 2013, & Jan. 31, 2013). We deny Lindsey’s motion to supplement the record on appeal and her motion to recuse several judges of this court. 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Vicki A. Lindsey appeals from the district court’s orders denying her three separate Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motions seeking reconsideration of the district court’s order granting summary judgment for the Defendants in her action alleging premises liability and negligent application of a banned substance. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lindsey v. Highwoods Realty Ltd. P’ship, No. 3:ll-cv-00447-HEH-DJN (E.D.Va. Dec. 5, 2012, Jan. 3, 2013, & Jan. 31, 2013). We deny Lindsey’s motion to supplement the record on appeal and her motion to recuse several judges of this court. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

521 F. App'x 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lindsey-v-highwoods-realty-ltd-partnership-ca4-2013.