Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
00-1984•William M. Nobles, d/b/a Stebrita Music v. Carlin America, Incorporated
00-1984Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit08.01.2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-1984
WILLIAM M. NOBLES, d/b/a Stebrita Music,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CARLIN AMERICA, INCORPORATED; TRIO MUSIC COM-
PANY, INCORPORATED,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
LIEBER & STOLLER,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-99-98-4-H)
Submitted: December 20, 2000 Decided: January 8, 2001
Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
Robert L. White, Greenville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert
C. Osterberg, ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB, New York, New York, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
William M. Nobles appeals the district court’s order applying
the doctrine of laches to his claim and entering summary judgment
in favor of the Defendants. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. According-
ly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nobles v.
Carlin America, Inc., No. CA-99-98-4-H (E.D.N.C. June 20, 2000).
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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.