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)
12-1301•Marvin Kimble Jones v. Wal-Mart; Sam’s Club; Steven Pazerdski
12-1301Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 30, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1301
MARVIN KIMBLE JONES,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
WAL-MART; SAM’S CLUB; STEVEN PAZERDSKI,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (8:10-cv-00988-JMC)
Submitted: May 24, 2012 Decided: May 30, 2012
Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marvin Kimble Jones, Appellant Pro Se. William Keefer Brumbach,
III, LITTLER MENDELSON PC, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Marvin Kimble Jones appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his civil action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v)
and 41(b) for failure to comply with Defendants’ discovery
requests as ordered. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Jones v. Wal-Mart, No. 8:10-cv-00988-JMC
(D.S.C. Mar. 2, 2012). 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.