Toll Bros. v. Gore

Fourth Circuit

Toll Bros. v. Gore

326 F. App'x 208

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 2009

DocketNo. 08-2306

StatusPublished

This text of 326 F. App'x 208 (Toll Bros. v. Gore) 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

Toll Bros. v. Gore, 326 F. App'x 208 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James G. Gore, Jr., and his wife, Jennifer J. Grafton-Gore, appeal the district court’s order and judgment granting Plaintiff summary judgment on its breach of contract claim and denying Defendants summary judgment on their counterclaims, and its judgment imposing sanctions on Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgments. See Toll Bros., Inc. v. Gore, No. 3:07-cv-00092-JPB-JES, 2008 WL 4911885 (N.D. W. Va. Nov. 12, 2008; Nov. 17, 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James G. Gore, Jr., and his wife, Jennifer J. Grafton-Gore, appeal the district court’s order and judgment granting Plaintiff summary judgment on its breach of contract claim and denying Defendants summary judgment on their counterclaims, and its judgment imposing sanctions on Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgments. See Toll Bros., Inc. v. Gore, No. 3:07-cv-00092-JPB-JES, 2008 WL 4911885 (N.D. W. Va. Nov. 12, 2008; Nov. 17, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

326 F. App'x 208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toll-bros-v-gore-ca4-2009.