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)
11-1457•Bernard J. Carl v. Bernardjcarl.com; Fabrice Marchisio; Cotty Vivant Marchisio & Lauzeral
11-1457Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 7, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1457
BERNARD J. CARL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BERNARDJCARL.COM; FABRICE MARCHISIO; COTTY VIVANT MARCHISIO
& LAUZERAL,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
NS HOLDING, INC., f/k/a Network Solutions, Incorporated;
JOHN DOE #1; JOHN DOE #2,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:07-cv-01128-TSE-TRJ)
Submitted: August 19, 2011 Decided: September 7, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard J. Carl, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bernard J. Carl appeals the district court’s judgment
awarding Carl $20,000 in punitive damages. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Carl v.
BernardJCarl.com, No. 1:07-cv-01128-TSE-TRJ (E.D. Va. Apr. 14,
2011). 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.