McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

Fourth Circuit

McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.

111 F. App'x 703

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 29, 2004

DocketNo. 04-1415

StatusPublished

This text of 111 F. App'x 703 (McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc.) 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

McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., 111 F. App'x 703 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Bryan Chad McGilton appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment for Appellees in McGilton’s tort action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., No. CA-02-117-5 (N.D.W.Va. Feb. 26, 2004). 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.

Bryan Chad McGilton appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment for Appellees in McGilton’s tort action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See McGilton v. U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., No. CA-02-117-5 (N.D.W.Va. Feb. 26, 2004). 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)

111 F. App'x 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgilton-v-us-xpress-enterprises-inc-ca4-2004.