R.T. v. N.G.S.C.
This text of R.T. v. N.G.S.C. (R.T. v. N.G.S.C.) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1384
R.T.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
N.G.S.C.; J.O.; E.M.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:07-cv-01079-RDB; 1:06-cv-01196-RDB)
Submitted: February 12, 2009 Decided: March 10, 2009
Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
R.T., Appellant Pro Se. Adam Harrison Garner, Robert Ross Niccolini, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
R.T. appeals the district court’s order denying his
petition to vacate in part and confirm in part an arbitrator’s
final award and his petition to vacate a second arbitrator’s
order dismissing the claims raised in a subsequent arbitration
action as barred by res judicata. We have thoroughly reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. R.T. v. N.G.S.C.,
Nos. 1:06-cv-01196-RDB; 1:07-cv-01079-RDB (D. Md. Feb. 26 & 27,
2008). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
R.T. v. N.G.S.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rt-v-ngsc-ca4-2009.