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)
14-2077•Howard M. Fitzgerald; Patricia A. Fitzgerald v. City of Petersburg
14-2077Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 18, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-2077
HOWARD M. FITZGERALD; PATRICIA A. FITZGERALD,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CITY OF PETERSBURG,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:14-cv-00333-HEH)
Submitted: February 12, 2015 Decided: February 18, 2015
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Howard M. and Patricia A. Fitzgerald, Appellants Pro Se.
Maurice Scott Fisher, Jr., HARMAN, CLAYTOR, CORRIGAN & WELLMAN,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Howard M. and Patricia A. Fitzgerald appeal the
district court’s orders denying their motions for
reconsideration. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. Fitzgerald v.
City of Petersburg, No. 3:14-cv-00333-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 12,
2014 & Sept. 9, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.