Filed: Jul. 28, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1427 MARK L. BRIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHARLOTTESVILLE/ ALBEMARLE; HAROLD YOUNG; DAVE BONEBRAKER; LUCKY HARRIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-130-3) Submitted: July 22, 1999 Decided: July 28, 1999 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affir
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1427 MARK L. BRIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHARLOTTESVILLE/ ALBEMARLE; HAROLD YOUNG; DAVE BONEBRAKER; LUCKY HARRIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-130-3) Submitted: July 22, 1999 Decided: July 28, 1999 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirm..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1427 MARK L. BRIGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHARLOTTESVILLE/ ALBEMARLE; HAROLD YOUNG; DAVE BONEBRAKER; LUCKY HARRIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-130-3) Submitted: July 22, 1999 Decided: July 28, 1999 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark L. Briggs, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Clinton Harris, Sr., Char- lottesville, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mark L. Briggs appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment for Defendants in his action alleging that his termination from employment with the Boys and Girls Club of Char- lottesville was discriminatory. 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. See Briggs v. Boys and Girls Club, No. CA-97-130-3 (W.D. Va. Mar. 10, 1999). We 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