McKinney v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.

Eighth Circuit

McKinney v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.

41 F. App'x 19

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJuly 23, 2002

DocketNo. 02-1258

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 41 F. App'x 19 (McKinney v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McKinney v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 41 F. App'x 19 (8th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity tort action, attorney Joey McCutchen appeals from the district court’s ¹ adverse grant of summary judgment as to his Arkansas attorney-lien claim. See Ark.Code Ann. § 16-22-304 (Michie 1999). Upon de novo review, see [20]*20First Bank of Marietta v. Hogge, 161 F.3d 506, 510 (8th Cir.1998), we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court, see 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity tort action, attorney Joey McCutchen appeals from the district court’s ¹ adverse grant of summary judgment as to his Arkansas attorney-lien claim. See Ark.Code Ann. § 16-22-304 (Michie 1999). Upon de novo review, see [20]*20First Bank of Marietta v. Hogge, 161 F.3d 506, 510 (8th Cir.1998), we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court, see 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 F. App'x 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckinney-v-bridgestonefirestone-inc-ca8-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack