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)
08-2291•Doris N. Anderson v. Duke Energy Corporation
08-2291Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 2, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2291
DORIS N. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (3:06-cv-00399-MR-DCK)
Submitted: June 23, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Doris N. Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. John James Doyle, Jr.,
CONSTANGY, BROOKS & SMITH, LLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina,
for Appellee
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Doris N. Anderson appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to the Defendant in her civil action.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Anderson v. Duke Energy Corp., No. 3:06-cv-00399-MR-DCK
(W.D.N.C. Oct. 14, 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.