St. Amand v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.

First Circuit

St. Amand v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.

104 F. App'x 193

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided August 10, 2004·No. 04-1019·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have read the briefs in this case, listened attentively to oral arguments, and reviewed the record with care. We conclude, without serious question, that the district court appropriately granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The material facts are not genuinely in dispute. The legal principles that govern this case are well-settled and the district court applied those principles faultlessly. Consequently, we summarily affirm the judgment below, substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court’s bench decision of November 5, 2003, and its sub *194 sequent memorandum and order dated November 6, 2003.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27(c).

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

PER CURIAM.

We have read the briefs in this case, listened attentively to oral arguments, and reviewed the record with care. We conclude, without serious question, that the district court appropriately granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The material facts are not genuinely in dispute. The legal principles that govern this case are well-settled and the district court applied those principles faultlessly. Consequently, we summarily affirm the judgment below, substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court’s bench decision of November 5, 2003, and its sub *194 sequent memorandum and order dated November 6, 2003.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27(c).

St. Amand v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp., 104 F. App'x 193 (1st Cir. 2004).

Pincite

104 F. App'x 193 (St. Amand v. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.