Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Brown v. Kentec, Incorporated, 99-2499 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-2499 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 01, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2499 JAMES F. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENTEC, INCORPORATED (CCW); LES PETERS, indi- vidually; PAM DAUGHERTY, individually, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-98-166-4-H) Submitted: February 24, 2000 Decided: March 1, 2000 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Ci
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2499 JAMES F. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENTEC, INCORPORATED (CCW); LES PETERS, indi- vidually; PAM DAUGHERTY, individually, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-98-166-4-H) Submitted: February 24, 2000 Decided: March 1, 2000 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James F. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Herbert Seesholtz Falk, Jr., William Francis Patterson, Jr., TURNER, ENOCHS & LLOYD, P.A., Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James F. Brown appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). 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 Brown v. Kentec, Incor- porated, No. CA-98-166-4-H (E.D.N.C. Oct. 7, 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
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