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)
02-1722•Thaddeus D. Williams v. United Parcel Service, Incorporated
02-1722Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit19.12.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1722
THADDEUS D. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-01-579)
Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 19, 2002
Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thaddeus D. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. James Phillip Naughton,
Sara Lynne Berg, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Thaddeus D. Williams appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment in favor of United Parcel Service, Inc.
on his claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 &
Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court, as stated from the bench. See Williams v. United Parcel
Serv., Inc., No. CA-01-579 (E.D. Va. June 11, 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.