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)
10-2025•James E. Smith v. Michelin North America, Incorporated
10-2025Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 25, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2025
JAMES E. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (3:09-cv-00022-JFA)
Submitted: January 18, 2011 Decided: January 25, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James E. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. William Lee Duda, OGLETREE,
DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
James E. Smith appeals the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting
Michelin’s motion for summary judgment in this employment
discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Smith v. Michelin N. Am., Inc., No.
3:09-cv-00022-JFA (D.S.C. Aug. 13, 2010). 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.