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)
06-1068•Carl Lester Maxwell v. Dak Americas
06-1068Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit13.02.2007
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1068
CARL LESTER MAXWELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DAK AMERICAS; MUNDY MAINTENANCE SERVICES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(2:05-cv-00141-DCN)
Submitted: January 8, 2007 Decided: February 13, 2007
Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit
Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chalmers C. Johnson, CHALMERS JOHNSON LAW FIRM, Charleston, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Stacy K. Wood, PARKER, POE, ADAMS &
BERNSTEIN, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina; Benjamin Weaver
Glass, III, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Carl Lester Maxwell appeals the district court’s opinion
and order granting summary judgment to DAK Americas and Mundy
Maintenance Services and dismissing his breach of employment
contract claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Maxwell v. DAK Americas, No. 2:05-cv-00141-DCN
(D.S.C. Dec. 13, 2005). 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.