Bogart v. Curry
Bogart v. Curry
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-2349
NANCY LEE BOGART,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DIMITRA J. CURRY; GEICO INSURANCE COMPANY; NA- TIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company & Affiliated Companies; CHRISTOPHER W. BOGART, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-97-907)
Submitted: March 12, 1998 Decided: March 23, 1998
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nancy Lee Bogart, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Lance Robey, ROBEY & TEUMER, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals the district court's order granting Appel-
lees' motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
and denying Appellant's motion to reconsider. See
28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(West 1993 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and
the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accord-
ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court and deny
Appellant's motion to compel Appellees to respond to interroga-
tories. Bogart v. Curry, No. CA-97-907 (E.D. Va. Aug. 13 & Sept. 8,
1997). 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
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished