Gregory Rheubottom v. WMATA, No. 12-2423 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2423 GREGORY RHEUBOTTOM, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant Appellee, and ALSTOM TRANSPORTATION, INC.; IFE NORTH AMERICA, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:09-cv-00485-PJM) Submitted: April 12, 2013 Decided: May 20, 2013 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Douglas K. Allston, Jr., ALLSTON & ASSOCIATES, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Mark F. Sullivan, Deputy General Counsel, Carol B. O Keeffe, General Counsel, Gerard J. Stief, Senior Associate General Counsel, Nicholas L. Phucas, Assistant General Counsel, WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In appeals the this personal district injury court s case, order Gregory granting supplemental motion for summary judgment. Rheubottom Appellee s On appeal, he argues that the district court misunderstood the evidence and erred in granting the motion. We disagree, and affirm the judgment. We review whether a district court erred in granting summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standards as the district court. Cir. 2012). Martin v. Lloyd, 700 F.3d 132, 135 (4th Summary judgment is only appropriate where there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id. In determining whether there is a genuine issue of material fact, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. However, a nonmoving party cannot defeat summary judgment with merely a scintilla of evidence. American Arms Int l v. Herbert, 563 F.3d 78, 82 (4th Cir. 2009). could not nonmoving lead a party, Where the record taken as a whole rational there trier is no of fact genuine to find issue for for the trial. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (internal quotation marks omitted). We district have court s supplemental motion reviewed stated for the record reasons summary 3 for and agree granting judgment. with the Appellee s Accordingly, we affirm the district court s order. See Rheubottom v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth., No. 8:09-cv-00485-PJM (D. Md. Oct. 19, 2012). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
