Court Opinion

ID: 9382183
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-24 21:01:50.199976+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:37.661782
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1443      Doc: 22         Filed: 03/23/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-1443

        JASMEN CORPORATION, d/b/a TAZ’s,

                             Debtor - Appellant,

                      v.

        CHRISTOPHER D. EDWARDS; CHRISTOPHER D. EDWARDS AGENCY, LLC;
        NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:21-cv-00206-M)

        Submitted: March 21, 2023                                         Decided: March 23, 2023

        Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Reginald B. Gillespie, Jr., WILSON & RATLEDGE, PLLC, Raleigh, North
        Carolina, for Appellant. David S. Coats, David S. Wisz, BAILEY & DIXON, LLP,
        Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company. R.
        Scott Brown, W. John Cathcart, Jr., BROWN, CRUMP, VANORE & TIERNEY, PLLC,
        Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees Christopher D. Edwards and Christopher D.
        Edwards Agency, LLC.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1443      Doc: 22        Filed: 03/23/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Jasmen Corporation appeals from the district court’s order dismissing its claims

        against Defendants as barred by the statutes of limitations. We have reviewed the record

        on appeal as well as the parties’ briefs, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

        affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jasmen Corp. v. Edwards, No. 5:21-cv-

        00206-M (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2022). 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