U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2001

Johnson v. Circuit City Stores

Johnson v. Circuit City Stores
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 23, 2001

Johnson v. Circuit City Stores

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-2144

JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 00-2145

JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

CIRCUIT CITY STORES; CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 00-2146

JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-98-1407-A, CA-99-695-A, CA-99-696-A)

Submitted: January 18, 2001 Decided: January 23, 2001

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph R. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Earle Duncan Getchell, Jr., MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Joseph R. Johnson appeals the district court’s orders denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 motions and his motion to vacate the judg- ment and remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., Nos. CA-98- 1407-A; CA-99-695-A; CA-99-696-A (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 1, 2000, entered Aug. 7, 2000; filed Aug. 3, 2000, entered Aug. 7, 2000; filed Aug. 15, 2000, entered Aug. 19, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.