The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-1739•Billy Earl Trent v. Atlantic Richfield Company
01-1739Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 14, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1739
BILLY EARL TRENT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY; STATE OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF MINES, MINERALS AND RECLAMATION;
SOVEREIGN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATES; EVAN ENERGY
COMPANY; PENN VIRGINIA RESOURCES CORPORATION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. James P. Jones, District
Judge. (CA-01-5-2)
Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 14, 2001
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy Earl Trent, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Brooks Riggs, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Big Stone Gap, Virginia; K. Jeff
Luethke, WILHOIT & KAISER, Kingsport, Tennessee, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Billy Earl Trent appeals the district court’s order dismissing
Trent’s civil lawsuit arising out of natural gas and oil explora-
tion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the rea-
soning of the district court. Trent v. Atlantic Richfield Co., No.
CA-01-5-2 (W.D. Va. May 21, 2001). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.