Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
02-1234•Thomas Guy McLemore, Sr v. BEACH FORD, INCORPORATED, a Virginia Corporation
02-1234Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit19.09.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1234
THOMAS GUY MCLEMORE, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BEACH FORD, INCORPORATED, a Virginia
Corporation,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
Judge. (CA-01-283-1)
Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 19, 2002
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Colt North, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellant.
Thomas M. Lucas, Kristina H. Vaquera, TROUTMAN SANDERS, L.L.P.,
Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Guy McLemore appeals from the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to Defendant in this action alleging age
discrimination in employment. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See McLemore v.
Beach Ford, Inc., No. CA-01-283-1 (E.D. Va. Feb. 4, 2002). 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.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.