Slaughter v. Barton

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 23, 2004
Docket03-2135
StatusUnpublished

This text of Slaughter v. Barton (Slaughter v. Barton) 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
Slaughter v. Barton, (4th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-2135

DAVID W. SLAUGHTER, Executor of the Estate of Louis M. Slaughter, deceased,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

LOUIS SLAUGHTER, SR., individually and by counsel, and by his duly named agent, David W. Slaughter,

Plaintiff,

versus

JAMES D. BARTON, a non-resident motorist, driver for Willis Shaw Express, Incorporated; WILLIE SHAW EXPRESS, INCORPORATED, Registered in Virginia; COMCAR INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, a foreign corporation not registered in Virginia,

Defendants - Appellees,

WILLIAM R. LIGHT, Personal representative and Administrator of the Estate of Carolyn P. Slaughter, deceased,

Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-02-60-6)

Submitted: February 9, 2004 Decided: March 23, 2004

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel B. Sweeney, Lynchburg, Virginia, for Appellant. Brian Jackson, James F. Neal, MCGUIREWOODS L.L.P., Charlottesville, Virginia; Amy M. Pocklington, MCGUIREWOODS L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

David W. Slaughter, executor of the estate of Louis M.

Slaughter, appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’

motion for summary judgment on his wrongful death action. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Slaughter v.

Barton, No. CA-02-60-6 (W.D. Va. June 25, 2003; Aug. 8, 2003). 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

- 3 -

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Slaughter v. Barton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slaughter-v-barton-ca4-2004.