Court Opinion

ID: 9956800
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-02 21:01:02.264202+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:54.254857
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1753      Doc: 12         Filed: 04/01/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1753

        DARYL OSRIC SUTTON, d/b/a Daryl Osric Sutton Express Trust,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        EQUITY RESOURCES INC., d/b/a Equity Resources of Ohio Inc.,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, Chief District Judge. (1:22-cv-00905-CCE-LPA)

        Submitted: March 28, 2024                                         Decided: April 1, 2024

        Before KING and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Daryl Osric Sutton, Appellant Pro Se. Claire Louise Collins, Hilton Terry Hutchens, Jr.,
        HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1753      Doc: 12         Filed: 04/01/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Daryl Osric Sutton appeals the district court’s orders granting Equity Resources’

        motion to dismiss, granting Equity’s motion for an extension of time, and denying Sutton’s

        motion to strike. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

        we affirm the district court’s orders. Sutton v. Equity Res. Inc., No. 1:22-cv-00905-CCE-

        LPA (M.D.N.C. Dec. 1, 2022 & June 22, 2023). 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