Norman H. Brooks, Jr. v. Robert G. Fiore

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 01-4133
NORMAN H. BROOKS, JR.,
Appellant
v.
ROBERT G. FIORE;
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Delaware
(D.C. Civil No. 00-cv-00803)
District Court Judge: Honorable Gregory M. Sleet
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
on December 20, 2002
Before: NYGAARD, ALITO and RENDELL, Circuit Judges
(Filed December 23, 2002)
OPINION OF THE COURT
RENDELL, Circuit Judge.
Norman H. Brooks Jr. brought suit against his former employer, Nationwide Mutual
Insurance Co., and supervisor, Robert G. Fiore, alleging various state and federal law
violations arising out of his employment and termination. On October 11, 2001, the

-- 1 of 3 --

2
District Court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants on all counts. Brooks now
appeals, arguing that the District Court erroneously decided disputed issues of material
fact. Our review is de novo. See Smathers v. Multi-Tool, Inc./Multi-Plastics, Inc.
Employee Health and Welfare Plan, 298 F.3d 191, 194 (3d Cir. 2002).
The District Court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, and we exercise
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. As we write solely for the parties, we need not
detail the factual background of this litigation.
After carefully reviewing the record and the District Court’s thorough and
persuasive opinion, we agree that there are no genuine issues of material fact, and that,
viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Brooks, defendants are entitled to judgment
as a matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-
23 (1986). Accordingly, we will affirm for substantially the reasons set forth by the
District Court.
The order of the District Court will be AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
TO THE CLERK OF COURT:
Please file the foregoing opinion.
/s/ Marjorie O. Rendell
Circuit Judge

-- 3 of 3 --