Joseph Thomas v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:16-cv-12337. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000287484].. [17-2253]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-2253 Doc: 23 Filed: 05/03/2018 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2253 JOSEPH S. THOMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:16-cv-12337) Submitted: April 26, 2018 Decided: May 3, 2018 Before KING, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monica T. Monday, Leslie S. Bowers, GENTRY LOCKE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Mark B. Stern, Dennis Fan, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Michael B. Stuart, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-2253 Doc: 23 Filed: 05/03/2018 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Joseph S. Thomas appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the United States on his Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) suit. Because the district court properly declined to apply West Virginia law governing equitable tolling, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Thomas v. United States, No. 5:16cv-12337 (S.D.W. Va. Oct. 2, 2017). See Anderson v. United States, 669 F.3d 161, 164 (4th Cir. 2011) (noting that federal law defines the limitations period for suits under the FTCA). 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

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?