Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Charles L. Freeze v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 96-1693 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-1693 Visitors: 6
Filed: Dec. 30, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 104 F.3d 358 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Charles L. FREEZE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee. No. 96-1693. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 19, 1996. Decided Dec. 30, 1996. Appeal fr
More

104 F.3d 358

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Charles L. FREEZE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 96-1693.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 1996.
Decided Dec. 30, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Salisbury. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-554-4)

Charles L. Freeze, Appellant Pro Se.

John Warren Stone, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

M.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his action filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Freeze v. Brown, No. CA-94-554-4 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 25, 1996). We deny Appellant's motion to appoint counsel and 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

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