United States ex rel. Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp.

Fourth Circuit

United States ex rel. Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp.

169 F. App'x 165

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 28, 2006·No. No. 05-2166·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jerry A. Hurst appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his complaint as filed beyond the limitations periods and on res judicata grounds, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp., No. CA-04-1205-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 17, 2005 & filed Sept. 15, 2005; entered Sept. 16, 2005). 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

PER CURIAM:

Jerry A. Hurst appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his complaint as filed beyond the limitations periods and on res judicata grounds, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp., No. CA-04-1205-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 17, 2005 & filed Sept. 15, 2005; entered Sept. 16, 2005). 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

United States ex rel. Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 169 F. App'x 165 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

169 F. App'x 165 (United States ex rel. Hurst v. Northrop Grumman Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.