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)
03-1884•Bruce A. Crenshaw v. Warehouse Employees Union, Local 322
03-1884Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit16.12.2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1884
BRUCE A. CRENSHAW,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 322,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-02-794)
Submitted: November 14, 2003 Decided: December 16, 2003
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bruce A. Crenshaw, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Gans Axelrod, BEINS,
AXELROD, KRAFT, GLEASON & GIBSON, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bruce A. Crenshaw appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his discrimination action. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. See Crenshaw v. Warehouse
Employees Union, Local 322, No. CA-02-794 (E.D. Va. July 15, 2003).
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.