Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    Arthur v. E.I. Dupont & Co., 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order granting costs to the defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company in a case brought by the plaintiffs Constance E. Arthur, Delmer Arthur, and Nathaniel Arthur. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decision upheld the district court's granting of costs to the defendant.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Arthur v. E.I. Dupont & Co., 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order granting costs to the defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company in a case brought by the plaintiffs Constance E. Arthur, Delmer Arthur, and Nathaniel Arthur. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decision upheld the district court's granting of costs to the defendant.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-06-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-1184

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order granting costs to the defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company in a case brought by the plaintiffs Constance E. Arthur, Delmer Arthur, and Nathaniel Arthur. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decision upheld the district court's granting of costs to the defendant.

    Copyright:

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

    Arthur v. E.I. Dupont & Co., 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's order granting costs to the defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company in a case brought by the plaintiffs Constance E. Arthur, Delmer Arthur, and Nathaniel Arthur. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decision upheld the district court's granting of costs to the defendant.

    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. 96-1184

    CONSTANCE E. ARTHUR; DELMER ARTHUR, her husband; NATHANIEL ARTHUR, an infant child, by
    his natural mother and next friend, Constance
    E. Arthur,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CA-93-182-2)
    Submitted:

    June 20, 1996

    Decided:

    June 28, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Constance E. Arthur, Appellant Pro Se. David Besserer Thomas,
    SPILMAN, THOMAS & BATTLE, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellants appeal from the district court's order granting
    costs to Defendant. 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. Arthur v. E. I. DuPont
    de Nemours & Co., No. CA-93-182-2 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 18, 1996). 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

    You might also like