Filed: Jan. 04, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2091 LINVAL A. BLAIR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLONNAS SHIPYARD, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. William T. Prince, Magistrate Judge. (CA-98-1360-2) Submitted: November 16, 1999 Decided: January 4, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linval A. Blair, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2091 LINVAL A. BLAIR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLONNAS SHIPYARD, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. William T. Prince, Magistrate Judge. (CA-98-1360-2) Submitted: November 16, 1999 Decided: January 4, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linval A. Blair, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2091 LINVAL A. BLAIR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLONNAS SHIPYARD, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. William T. Prince, Magistrate Judge. (CA-98-1360-2) Submitted: November 16, 1999 Decided: January 4, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linval A. Blair, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael Lucas, Ruth Litvin, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Linval A. Blair appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to his former employer and dismissing his em- ployment discrimination complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Blair v. Colonnas Shipyard, Inc., No. CA-98-1360-2 (E.D. Va. July 7, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
