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)
01-1598•Steven J. Taylor v. Ritz Camera Centers, Incorporated
01-1598Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 25, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1598
STEVEN J. TAYLOR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RITZ CAMERA CENTERS, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CA-99-3226-WMN)
Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Steven J. Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Harriet Ellen Cooperman, SAUL
EWING, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Steven J. Taylor appeals from the district court’s order
granting summary judgment in favor of Ritz Camera Centers in his
action in which he asserted claims of 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. Taylor v. Ritz Camera Ctrs, No. CA-99-3226-
WMN (D. Md. filed Mar. 29, 2001; entered Mar. 30, 2001). We dis-
pense 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.