Angela Bachman v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00263-CCE-PTS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998726882].. [11-1402]
Appeal: 11-1402
Document: 25
Date Filed: 11/21/2011
Page: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1402
ANGELA BACHMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of
Jeffrey Bachman,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION; TOYOTA MOTOR
INCORPORATED, a California Corporation,
SALES,
U.S.A.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District
District of North Carolina, at Durham.
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00263-CCE-PTS)
Submitted:
October 20, 2011
Court for the Middle
Catherine C. Eagles,
Decided:
November 21, 2011
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael W. Patrick, LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL W. PATRICK, Chapel
Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Joel H. Smith, Shawn B.
Deery, BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP, Columbia, South Carolina; Leslie
Lane Mize, NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, LLP, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-1402
Document: 25
Date Filed: 11/21/2011
Page: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Angela Bachman (“Bachman”), as personal representative
of the estate of Jeffrey Bachman, appeals the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing her civil complaint.
The district court dismissed
the action on the grounds that it was barred by res judicata
See Jaffe v.
because of Bachman’s earlier California action.
Accredited Surety & Cas. Co., 294 F.3d 584, 590-91 (4th Cir.
2002) (regarding
full
faith
and
credit
given
court actions in any later federal suit).
to
prior
state
We review de novo a
district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6), see Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem’l Hosp., 572 F.3d
176,
179-80
(4th
Cir.
2009),
reveals no reversible error.
and
our
review
of
the
record
Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court.
Bachman v. Toyota Motor
Corp., No. 1:10-cv-00263-CCE-PTS (M.D.N.C. Apr. 14, 2011).
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
We
legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?