McLaughlin v. Chrysler Corporation

47 F. App'x 659
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 8, 2002
Docket02-1553
StatusUnpublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 47 F. App'x 659 (McLaughlin v. Chrysler Corporation) 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
McLaughlin v. Chrysler Corporation, 47 F. App'x 659 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gary McLaughlin appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant, Daimler-Chrysler Corporation in this action under West Virginia’s lemon law, W. Va.Code Ann. §§ 46A-6A-1 through 46A-6A-9 (Michie 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the district court’s reasoning that McLaughlin was not a consumer within the scope of W. Va.Code Ann. § 46A-6A-2, and thus was not protected by the statute. * See McLaughlin v. Chrysler Corp., No. CA-98-115-2 (N.D.W.Va. May 3, 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.

*

Because we find this issue dispositive, we have not considered, and express no opinion, as to the alternative basis for the district court’s judgment.

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

Related

Harris v. Forest River, Inc.
S.D. West Virginia, 2024
Burton v. Chrysler Group, LLC (In re Old Carco LLC)
492 B.R. 392 (S.D. New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 F. App'x 659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mclaughlin-v-chrysler-corporation-ca4-2002.