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)
01-1756•Walter J. Bailey, Jr v. William J. Henderson
01-1756Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 13, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1756
WALTER J. BAILEY, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM J. HENDERSON,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-00-1996-6-20)
Submitted: October 31, 2001 Decided: November 13, 2001
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Walter J. Bailey, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David George Karro,
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Walter J. Bailey, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this employment
discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the dis-
trict court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magis-
trate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
on the reasoning of the district court. Bailey v. Henderson, No.
CA-00-1996-6-20 (D.S.C. May 9 & 25, 2001). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.