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)
08-2184•Donald M. Boysaw v. Michael Friedman; Howard R. Udell; Paul Goldenheim
08-2184Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 6, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2184
DONALD M. BOYSAW,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL FRIEDMAN; HOWARD R. UDELL; PAUL GOLDENHEIM,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
PURDUE PHARMA,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, Chief
District Judge. (1:07-cv-00079-jpj-pms)
Submitted: March 26, 2009 Decided: April 6, 2009
Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donald M. Boysaw, Appellant Pro Se. Cameron Scott Bell, William
W. Eskridge, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Donald M. Boysaw appeals the district court’s order
granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Boysaw
v. Friedman, No. 1:07-cv-00079-jpj-pms (W.D. Va. Sept. 30,
2008). 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.