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)
09-1193•Jimmy Mullins v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore City
09-1193Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 22, 2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1193
JIMMY MULLINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE CITY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge.
(1:07-cv-02690-CCB)
Submitted: January 27, 2010 Decided: February 22, 2010
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John B. Stolarz, THE STOLARZ LAW FIRM, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellant. George A. Nilson, City Solicitor, Gwen B. Tromley,
Assistant Solicitor, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Jimmy Mullins appeals the district court’s orders
denying his motion for leave to amend his complaint and granting
the Appellee’s motion for summary judgment on Mullins’ claim of
age discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Mullins v. Mayor, No. 1:07-cv-02690-CCB
(D. Md. Jan. 20, 2009). 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.