Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Rogers v. Rogers, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Charles Edward Lee Rogers and Walter M. Rogers Jr., Ronald A. Rogers, and Ronald Rogers Brothers Inc. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Rogers' motion for declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Fourth Circuit denied the Appellees' motion for sanctions and affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the district court's opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Rogers v. Rogers, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Charles Edward Lee Rogers and Walter M. Rogers Jr., Ronald A. Rogers, and Ronald Rogers Brothers Inc. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Rogers' motion for declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Fourth Circuit denied the Appellees' motion for sanctions and affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the district court's opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-10-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-1679

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Charles Edward Lee Rogers and Walter M. Rogers Jr., Ronald A. Rogers, and Ronald Rogers Brothers Inc. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Rogers' motion for declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Fourth Circuit denied the Appellees' motion for sanctions and affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the district court's opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    11 views2 pages

    Rogers v. Rogers, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Charles Edward Lee Rogers and Walter M. Rogers Jr., Ronald A. Rogers, and Ronald Rogers Brothers Inc. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Rogers' motion for declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Fourth Circuit denied the Appellees' motion for sanctions and affirmed the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning provided in the district court's opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-1679

    CHARLES EDWARD LEE ROGERS,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    WALTER M. ROGERS, JR.; RONALD
    ROGERS BROTHERS, INCORPORATED,

    A.

    ROGERS;
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-97-121-A)
    Submitted:

    September 25, 1997

    Decided:

    October 8, 1997

    Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Charles Edward Lee Rogers, Appellant Pro Se. H. Jan Roltsch-Anoll,
    COMPTON & DULING, Woodbridge, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing, for
    lack of subject matter jurisdiction, his motion for declaratory
    judgment. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
    discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Rogers v. Rogers, No. CA-97-121-A
    (E.D. Va. Apr. 18, 1997). The Appellees' motion for sanctions is
    hereby denied. 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