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)
05-1665•William T. Eng v. Norfolk Southern Corporation
05-1665Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 15, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1665
WILLIAM T. ENG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (CA-02-134-7)
Submitted: January 23, 2006 Decided: February 15, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David H. Shapiro, Ellen K. Renaud, SWICK & SHAPIRO, P.C.,
Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Agnis C. Chakravorty, Frank K.
Friedman, WOODS ROGERS, P.L.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
PER CURIAM:
William T. Eng appeals the district court’s grant of summary
judgment to Norfolk Southern Corp. on his race and national-origin
discrimination claims under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Eng v. Norfolk Southern Corp., No. CA-02-134-7 (W.D.
Va. May 24, 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 in the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.