Ralph E. Facemire v. Ben J. Powers Hazel Powers

983 F.2d 1055, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 37285, 1992 WL 385244
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 23, 1992
Docket92-1428
StatusUnpublished

This text of 983 F.2d 1055 (Ralph E. Facemire v. Ben J. Powers Hazel Powers) 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
Ralph E. Facemire v. Ben J. Powers Hazel Powers, 983 F.2d 1055, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 37285, 1992 WL 385244 (4th Cir. 1992).

Opinion

983 F.2d 1055

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Ralph E. FACEMIRE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Ben J. POWERS; Hazel Powers, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 92-1428.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: September 15, 1992
Decided: December 23, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-91-1624-A)

Ralph E. Facemire, Appellant Pro Se.

Eric Franklin Schell, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

This case involves the sale and lease of certain heavy construction equipment. Facemire alleges fraud and interference with contract by Ben and Hazel Powers (the Powers) arising from the sale and lease of the equipment. The Powers argue that this action is an attempt to relitigate issues that have already been decided against Facemire.

We find that the same basic issue was decided by the Circuit Court of Fauquier County, Virginia, in a previous case between the same parties. Therefore, the district court was correct in holding that this case was barred by res judicata. Flora, Flora & Montague, Inc. v. Saunders, 367 S.E.2d 493 (Va. 1988).

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

Related

Flora, Flora & Montague, Inc. v. Saunders
367 S.E.2d 493 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
983 F.2d 1055, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 37285, 1992 WL 385244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralph-e-facemire-v-ben-j-powers-hazel-powers-ca4-1992.