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)
04-1130•Kamil A. Mesays v. Home Depot, Germantown
04-1130Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit06.07.2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1130
KAMIL A. MESAYS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
HOME DEPOT, GERMANTOWN,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA-
03-64)
Submitted: May 26, 2004 Decided: July 6, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kamil A. Mesays, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Eugene Mirengoff, Joyce
Elaine Taber, Michele Harrington Murphy, AKIN, GUMP, STRAUSS, HAUER
& FELD, L.L.P., 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Kamil A. Mesays appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for summary judgment and granting Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment in Mesays’ employment discrimination
action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Mesays v. Home Depot, No. CA-03-64 (D. Md. Jan. 20, 2004). 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.