United States v. Norman Young, 915 F.2d 1566 (4th Cir. 1990). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Norman Young, 915 F.2d 1566 (4th Cir. 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
26 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest negative: Ball v. Versar, Inc. (insd, 2006-09-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Ball v. Versar, Inc.
S.D. Ind. · 2006 · signal: but see · confidence high
Co. Ltd., 992 F.Supp. 278 , 286 (S.D.N.Y.1998) (following bench trial, concluding that defendants had breached forum selection clause requiring that they submit to jurisdiction of United States for non-payment claims by initiating a declaratory judgment action in England; defendants were liable for expenses plaintiff had incurred in defending the English action); but see Wells v. Entre Computer Centers, Inc., 915 F.2d 1566 , 1990 WL 146981 , *3 n. 3 (4th Cir.1990) (per curiam ) (unpublished) (affirming district court’s dismissal of counterclaim for damages based on franchisees' breach of for…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Norman Young
90-6865.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Nov 8, 1990.
915 F.2d 1566
Unpublished

915 F.2d 1566
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Norman YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-6865.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 28, 1990.
Decided Oct. 1, 1990.
Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied Nov. 8, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CR-86-63-CR-3; CA-90-28-CIV-3)

Norman Young, appellant pro se.

Thomas Philip Swain, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, N.C., for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before K.K. HALL, SPROUSE and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Norman Young appeals from the district court's order dismissing his federal suit alleging that his plea agreement had been violated. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit.[*] Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Young, CR-86-63-CR-3; CA-90-28-CIV-3 (E.D.N.C. July 9, 1990). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

2

AFFIRMED.

*

In his informal brief Young claims that he should have received concurrent, rather than consecutive, sentences. Because this issue was not raised before the district court, we decline to decide its merit on appeal