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)
10-1119•Warren Katz v. HOLLAND AND KNIGHT, LLP.; THOMAS M. BROWNELL, Esq.; JOCELYN W. BRITTIN, Esq.
10-1119Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 29, 2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1119
WARREN KATZ,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
HOLLAND AND KNIGHT, LLP.; THOMAS M. BROWNELL, Esq.; JOCELYN
W. BRITTIN, Esq.,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-01106-TSE-IDD)
Submitted: July 22, 2010 Decided: July 29, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Warren Katz, Appellant Pro Se. John Thorpe Richards, Jr.,
Robert P. Trout, TROUT CACHERIS, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Warren Katz appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his civil action based on res judicata. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Katz v.
Holland & Knight, LLP, No. 1:09-cv-01106-TSE-IDD (E.D. Va. filed
Jan. 8, 2010 & entered Jan. 11, 2010). 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.