Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Bailey v. Black Entertainment Television, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Samuel Bailey's copyright infringement complaint against Black Entertainment Television, Inc. and other defendants. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its May 3, 2010 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-09-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-1623

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Samuel Bailey's copyright infringement complaint against Black Entertainment Television, Inc. and other defendants. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its May 3, 2010 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Bailey v. Black Entertainment Television, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Samuel Bailey's copyright infringement complaint against Black Entertainment Television, Inc. and other defendants. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its May 3, 2010 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the case materials.

    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. 10-1623

    SAMUEL G. BAILEY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    BLACK ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION, INC.; PARAMOUNT; VIACOM,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    James R. Spencer, Chief
    District Judge. (3:09-cv-00787-JRS)

    Submitted:

    August 26, 2010

    Decided:

    September 1, 2010

    Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Samuel G. Bailey, Appellant Pro Se.


    John B. OKeefe, LEVINE
    SULLIVAN KOCH & SCHULZ, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Samuel G. Bailey appeals the district courts order
    denying

    his

    Television,

    copyright
    Inc.

    reversible error.

    We

    complaint
    have

    against

    reviewed

    the

    Black

    Entertainment

    record

    and

    find

    no

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    Bailey v. Black Entmt Television, Inc.,

    No. 3:009-cv-00787-JRS (E.D. Va. May 3, 2010).

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    the

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.


    AFFIRMED

    You might also like