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)
17-1580•Luscious Graham v. Antero Resources Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
17-1580Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 8, 2018
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1580
LUSCIOUS GRAHAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Clarksburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00026-FPS-MJA)
Submitted: February 20, 2018 Decided: March 8, 2018
Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Luscious Graham, Appellant Pro Se. W. Henry Lawrence, IV, Justin Aaron Rubenstein,
Amy Marie Smith, STEPTOE & JOHNSON PLLC, Bridgeport, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Luscious Graham filed a civil action in West Virginia state court, which the
Defendant removed to federal district court based on diversity jurisdiction. The district
court denied Graham’s subsequent motion to remand to state court and ultimately granted
summary judgment to the Defendant. Graham’s sole challenge on appeal is to the district
court’s order finding diversity jurisdiction and denying her motion to remand. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed
in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Graham v. Antero
Res. Corp., No. 1:16-cv-00026-FPS-MJA (N.D.W. Va. July 26, 2016; Apr. 7, 2017). 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.