Snodgrass v. Day et al, No. 7:2015cv00075 - Document 22 (W.D. Va. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 9/30/2015. (slt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
CL S OFFI U, , ST COURI ERK' CE S DI . AT ROANOKE, VA FI LED I THE UNI N TED STATES DI STRI COURT CT FO R TH E W ESTERN DI STRI T O F V I G I I C R N A ROANOK E DI SI W ON KEVI SNODGR ASS,,R. N I , sE 32 2 1 F 25 BYU 9. J L DUD , RK C ; DE ' f vct' CASE NO.7: 15CV00 075 . Pl i i f a nt f , V. M EM OR ANDUM OPI ON M TORIRAI FORD, K , C By: Gln E. n a e Co r d Chi fU nie St e Di t i Judge e t d at s s r ct Dee nts. fnda t) Ke n Snodg as ,J . a Vigni i t pr e ng pr K ,fld t s cvi rght a ton vi r s r, r i a nma e oc edi o ie hi i l i s c i Purua t 42 U. C. j 1 s nt o S. 983, algi t t t dee n prs ofii s pl e hi i le ng ha he fnda t ion fcal ac d m n ad i sr tve s gr ga i wiho due pr s a r t la e ag ns li f flng g i vanc s m nitai e e ton t ut oce s nd ea it d ai t lm or ii re e. The c t gr t d hi m o i n t n nd t c our an e s to o me he ompli , but t n sl a iy dim is d t ant he lmm rl s s e he c mplit a n n e ,wih u p eu ie pls n t 2 U. C.j 1 5 b () f rf i r t o an , s me d d t o t rj d c t ua t o 8 S. r 91 A( )1, o al e o u sae a c n ttto lcam a to a l u d r j 1 8 . M o e ta t we ks ltr S o g a s tt o siuina li cin b e n e 9 3 r h n wo e ae, n d r s s ubmit a moton f rr o i r ton,a ki t co tt r i t t t a ton a a l li t ted i o ec nsde a i s ng he ur o ensa e he c i nd low lm o s pplm e i wih addii na cli s Fi ngno go ca e t m o i n mus be de ed. u e nt t t to l am . ndi od us , he to t ni Be us t m oton f r r c i r ton wa fld wihi 28 da fom e r of t ca e he i o e onsde a i s ie tn ys r nty he d s sa o d r t e c u t s c nsd ri a aiig t e Ru e 5 ()o t eFe ea Ru e o imis l r e , h o r mu t o ie t s rsn md r l 9e f h d r l ls f Ci i Pr c d . Gll c n ieain o aj d me ta tri e ty i a e ta r i ay rme y vl o e me lk e o sd rto f u g n fe t nr s n x ro d n r e d l s whih s d be us d s rngl ' Pac I .Co.v.Am .Na ' Fie l .Co. 1 F. 396,403 c houl e pa i y.' . ns tl r ns , 48 3d Snodgrass v. Day et al Doc. 22 ( h Ci.1 )(ne a quotton maksa ctton omitd) Ac or ngl Ghee ae t ee 4t r 998 itm l ai r nd iai te . c di y, ç r r hr t g o n s fr a n ig a e rir j d me t (md r Ru e 5 (): ( ) t A c mmo ae a r u d o me dn n a l u g n t e l 9 e1 1 o c o d t n e itr e n c a ei c n lng lw;( )t a c u tfrn w e d n en ta alb ea til o ne v nig h ng n o kol a 2 o c o n o e vie c o v ia l t ra; r i ( )t c re tace rer ro 1w o prv n ma ietij tc . I . 3 o o rc la ro f a r e e t n fs nusie' d ' Dockets.Justia.com Snodg a s f is t de o tae a gr r s al o m nsrt ny ound on whih he i e il d t r le fom t c s ntte o e if r he d s sa o d rt e Ru e 5 () He f ist s w a y g omd o whih t e c mpan a imis l r e md r l 9 e . al o ho n r t n c h o lit s n n e wa er n o l d s se frfi et saeaj1 3dam, n itr e i c a ei me d d s ro e usy imis d o al o tt m 98 i a y n ev nng h ng n t lw,or any ne e de e no a lbl bef e t dimis l i s por oft dim is d he a w vi nc t vaia e or he s s a n up t he s s e cams F rhemo e t e c u t i d n j si to t alw S o g m sn w t fl a dto l li . u t r r , h o r fn s o u tkain o lo n d r s o o ie d iina t camsi aco e a to t a fie t saea y j1 8 cam .Hi p o o e s pp e n d e n t li n ls d cin h t ald o tt n 9 3 li s r p s d u lme t o s o sa e f c sc r tng t de i nc e f whih t n e d c tt a t oreci he sc e i s or c he m nde ompl i wasdim is Fi ly, ant s s ed. na l t bu k oft s plm e a co antc e t tt def nda sc pie t i e f r w ih he l he up e nt l mpli ontnds ha he e nt ons r d o nt re e t Snodgr s ' a tmpt t e us ad i sr tve r m e es a s s te s o xha t m i ta i e di . Be aus i t s ha no c e nma e ve co tmtonalrgh t a prs n gre nce pr dur ort pm i i t i a e si pr dm e nsi i i to io i va oce e o cpa e n n xitng oce , i e f r nc wih orde alo ac es t s h apr e te doe no i ia e a c tt tona l nt re e e t ni f c s o uc oc dtr s t mplc t ny onsiu i ly p o e tdrg ta rq ie t b a to be t e j1 8 . Ad msv. c , F.d 7 7 (t r tce ih s e ur d o e cina l md r 9 3 a Rie 40 3 2, 5 4h Ci.1 9 ) r 94. Fort sa e r as ,t co twilde bot t m oton f r c i r ton a t he tt d e ons he ur l ny h he i or e onsde a i nd he r ques t s e e t c e t o upplm nt he ompli . An a o it or rwilis t sda ant ppr pra e de l s ue hi y. The Clr i die t d t s nd co e of t s me or ndlm o ni n a a compa ng ek s rce o e pis hi m a l pi o nd c nyi or rt pli tf . de o a n if * EN TER : Thi % n s 201 d yo ç- ' Ece , 5 a f o m . . Chi fU nie St t sD i t i tJ e t d a e s rc udge
]]>
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.
