Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Stone v. City of Seneca, South Carolina, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Stephen Stone appealed a district court's decision granting summary judgment to the City of Seneca on all of Stone's claims. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before it and argument would not aid its decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-05-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-1693

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Stephen Stone appealed a district court's decision granting summary judgment to the City of Seneca on all of Stone's claims. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before it and argument would not aid its decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    Stone v. City of Seneca, South Carolina, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Stephen Stone appealed a district court's decision granting summary judgment to the City of Seneca on all of Stone's claims. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before it and argument would not aid its decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-1693

    STEPHEN W. STONE,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    SENECA SOUTH CAROLINA, CITY OF,
    Defendant Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Anderson.
    Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.
    (8:07-cv-03401-HFF)

    Submitted:

    April 22, 2010

    Decided:

    May 12, 2010

    Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Mary C. McCormac, Clemson, South Carolina, for Appellant. Vance


    J. Bettis, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS, L.L.P., Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Stephen W. Stone appeals the district courts order
    granting summary judgment in favor of the City of Seneca on all
    of Stones claims.
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    Stone v. City of Seneca, South Carolina,

    No. 8:07-cv-03401-HFF (D.S.C. May 14, 2009).


    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    and

    materials

    We dispense with

    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.


    AFFIRMED

    You might also like