The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
00-2447•David Ward v. LAWRENCE H. SUMMERS, Secretary of the Treasury
00-2447Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 1, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-2447
DAVID WARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LAWRENCE H. SUMMERS, Secretary of the
Treasury,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.
(CA-00-258-JFM)
Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: August 1, 2001
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David A. Branch, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. BRANCH, P.C., Washington,
D.C., for Appellant. Stephen M. Schenning, United States Attorney,
Nadira Clarke, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Mary-
land, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
David Ward appeals the district court’s order dismissing his
civil action alleging employment discrimination. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Ward v. Summers, No. CA-00-258-JFM (D. Md. Oct. 26,
2000); see also Cook v. CSX Transp. Corp., 988 F.2d 507, 511 (4th
Cir. 1993) (stating standard for reviewing claim of discriminatory
disparate treatment). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.