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)
99-1740•Nora L. Fozard v. Publishers Clearing House, Incorporated
99-1740Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 8, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1740
NORA L. FOZARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PUBLISHERS CLEARING HOUSE, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-98-149-1)
Submitted: December 22, 1999 Decided: February 8, 2000
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles R. Holton, Natalie J. McKinney, MOORE & VAN ALLEN,
P.L.L.C., Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert W.
Spearman, R. Bruce Thompson, II, PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN,
L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina; James W. Harbison, Jr., MORGAN,
LEWIS & BOCKIUS, L.L.P., New York, New York, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Nora Fozard appeals the district court’s order granting Appel-
lee’s motion to dismiss. We have reviewed the record and the dis-
trict court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Fozard v.
Publishers Clearing House, Inc., No. CA-98-149-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 29,
1999). 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.