John Woods v. the Boeing Company

13-2455Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit30.09.2014

Gesamter Gesetzestext

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2455
JOHN WOODS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE BOEING COMPANY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (2:11-cv-02855-RMG)
Submitted: September 26, 2014 Decided: September 30, 2014
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerald L. Gilliard, Joseph R. Hennell, THE LAW OFFICE OF GERALD
L. GILLIARD, ESQ., LLC, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Cherie
W. Blackburn, Michael P. Scott, NEXSEN PRUET, LLC, Charleston,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
John Woods appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment to his former employer on his claims that the
employer failed to accommodate his disabilities and discharged
him in retaliation for requesting such accommodations, and he
appeals the order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We
have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Woods v. The Boeing Co.,
No. 2:11-cv-02855-RMG (D.S.C. Sept. 19, 2013; Oct. 30, 2013).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.