Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Michael Jones v. Daly Seven, Inc., 14-2069 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-2069 Visitors: 19
Filed: Feb. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2069 MICHAEL FORREST JONES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DALY SEVEN, INC.; JON M. DALY, JR.; NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00510-WO-JLW) Submitted: February 12, 2015 Decided: February 18, 2015 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirme
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2069 MICHAEL FORREST JONES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DALY SEVEN, INC.; JON M. DALY, JR.; NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cv-00510-WO-JLW) Submitted: February 12, 2015 Decided: February 18, 2015 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Forrest Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Dena Beth Langley, HAGAN DAVIS MANGUM BARRETT & LANGLEY, PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina; Nancy Kessler Platt, Marissa Ann Wagner, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Forrest Jones appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil action regarding unfair labor practice charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. Daly Seven, Inc., No. 1:12-cv-00510-WO-JLW (M.D.N.C. Sept. 9, 2014). 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 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer