KIRALY v. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES LOCAL 2250, 13-2171. (2014)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20140904091
Visitors: 9
Filed: Sep. 04, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2014
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Maria S. Kiraly appeals from the district court's order granting Appellee's motion to dismiss, dismissing her complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and denying her request to file an amended complaint. We have reviewed the briefs on appeal and the record, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * (J.A. at 73-82). We dispense with oral argu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Maria S. Kiraly appeals from the district court's order granting Appellee's motion to dismiss, dismissing her complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and denying her request to file an amended complaint. We have reviewed the briefs on appeal and the record, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * (J.A. at 73-82). We dispense with oral argum..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Maria S. Kiraly appeals from the district court's order granting Appellee's motion to dismiss, dismissing her complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and denying her request to file an amended complaint. We have reviewed the briefs on appeal and the record, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.* (J.A. at 73-82). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
FootNotes
* In addition, we note that, on appeal, Kiraly untimely raises a retaliation claim pursuant to the Labor-Management Recording and Disclosure Act ("LMRDA") which was not raised below. However, even if we considered the LMRDA claim on the merits, this statute is not applicable to state employees. See 29 U.S.C. § 402(e) (2012); Smith v. Office and Professional Employees Int'l Union, 821 F.2d 355, 355-56 (6th Cir. 1987).
Source: Leagle
