TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Graham Majette v. Norfolk Naval Shipyard William G. Adams William Cooper William A. Freeman William A. White, Jr., and United States of America

Graham Majette v. Norfolk Naval Shipyard William G. Adams William Cooper William A. Freeman William A. White, Jr., & United States, 966 F.2d 1443 (4th Cir. 1992)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 17, 1992
Docket
No. 91-2373
Citations
966 F.2d 14431992 WL 1328551992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21694
Status
Unpublished

Opinion

966 F.2d 1443

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Graham MAJETTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD; William G. Adams; William Cooper; William A. Freeman; William A. White, Jr., Defendants-Appellees, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

No. 91-2373.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 30, 1992 Decided: June 17, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-91-81-2)

Graham Majette, Appellant Pro Se.

J. Phillip Krajewski, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS, SPROUSE, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Graham Majette appeals from the district court's order denying relief under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.s 1346(b) (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Majette v. Norfolk Naval Shipyard, No. CA-9181-2 (E.D. Va. Nov. 25, 1991). 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

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list