Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Martin v. Pantry Incorporated, 95-2792 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-2792 Visitors: 18
Filed: Feb. 26, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2792 JAMES C. MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE PANTRY, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-93-319-3-MU) Submitted: January 30, 1996 Decided: February 26, 1996 Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2792 JAMES C. MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE PANTRY, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-93-319-3-MU) Submitted: January 30, 1996 Decided: February 26, 1996 Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James C. Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Randel Eugene Phillips, Karin Marie McGinnis, MOORE & VAN ALLEN, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment on Appellant's Age Discrim- ination in Employment claim. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magis- trate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Martin v. Pantry Incorporated, No. CA-93-319-3-MU (W.D.N.C. Aug. 18, 1995). We deny Defendant's motion to strike 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 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