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)
06-1606•Frank A. Johnson v. Square Dcompany, a/k/a Schneider Electric
06-1606Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 15, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1606
FRANK A. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SQUARE D COMPANY, a/k/a Schneider Electric,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:03-cv-03504-MJP)
Submitted: November 8, 2006 Decided: November 15, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frank A. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. George Daniel Ellzey, Charles
F. W. Manning, II, FISHER & PHILLIPS, L.L.P., Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Frank A. Johnson appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting
Defendant Square D Company’s motion for summary judgment, and
dismissing Johnson’s complaint. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. See Johnson v. Square D Co., No.
3:03-cv-03504-MJP (D.S.C. Apr. 21, 2006). 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.