Reynolds v. Swift Transportation Co.

Fourth Circuit

Reynolds v. Swift Transportation Co.

380 F. App'x 349

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 28, 2010·No. No. 09-2124·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Deborah Reynolds appeals the district court’s order entering judgment for Defendants in accordance with the jury’s verdict in Reynolds’ negligence action. We have reviewed the record and the issues Reynolds raises on appeal and find no grounds for appellate relief. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Reynolds v. Swift Transp. Co., Inc., No. 3:07-cv-00457 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 2, 2009). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Deborah Reynolds appeals the district court’s order entering judgment for Defendants in accordance with the jury’s verdict in Reynolds’ negligence action. We have reviewed the record and the issues Reynolds raises on appeal and find no grounds for appellate relief. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Reynolds v. Swift Transp. Co., Inc., No. 3:07-cv-00457 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 2, 2009). 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.

Reynolds v. Swift Transportation Co., 380 F. App'x 349 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

380 F. App'x 349 (Reynolds v. Swift Transportation Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.