Filed: Apr. 25, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2347 DONALD RAY GILBERT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COOPER INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, Cooper Hand Tools Division, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-99-441-5-H) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 25, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cur
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2347 DONALD RAY GILBERT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COOPER INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, Cooper Hand Tools Division, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-99-441-5-H) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 25, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2347 DONALD RAY GILBERT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COOPER INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED, Cooper Hand Tools Division, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-99-441-5-H) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 25, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Ray Gilbert, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas J. Manley, Maria Eugenia Hallas, David Christopher Lindsay, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donald Ray Gilbert appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his claims of violation of the Americans with Dis- abilities Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101-12213 (West 1995 & Supp. 2000), and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. 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. Gilbert v. Cooper Indus., Inc., No. CA-99-441- 5-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 5, 2000). 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