Fraley v. Stoddard
Fraley v. Stoddard
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1505
WILLIS FRALEY, JR.; LANETTE L. FRALEY,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
SEAN R. STODDARD, D.P.M.; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 99-1506
WILLIS FRALEY, JR.; LANETTE L. FRALEY,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert J. Staker, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-248-3, CA-97-866-3) Submitted: August 24, 1999 Decided: September 14, 1999
Before MURNAGHAN, ERVIN, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James E. Spurlock, SPURLOCK LAW OFFICES, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellants. Kevin A. Nelson, KAY, CASTO & CHANEY, P.L.L.C, Charleston, West Virginia; Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attor- ney, Stephen M. Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia; Ray L. Hampton, II, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
2 PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Willis and Lanette Fraley ap-
peal the district court’s order granting the appellees’ motion in
limine, denying the Fraleys’ motion for a continuance, and granting
the appellees’ motions for summary judgment. We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Fraley v. Stoddard, No. CA-97-248-3 (S.D.W. Va. Apr. 9,
1999); Fraley v. United States, No. CA-97-866-3 (S.D.W. Va. Apr. 9,
1999). 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
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished