Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Tayn v. Kidde, 01-2421 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-2421 Visitors: 7
Filed: Feb. 21, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2421 WEALEGBAY J.G. TAYN, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WALTER KIDDE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CA-00-749-1) Submitted: February 6, 2002 Decided: February 21, 2002 Before WIDENER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wealegbay J.G. Tayn, Sr., Appell
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2421 WEALEGBAY J.G. TAYN, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WALTER KIDDE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CA-00-749-1) Submitted: February 6, 2002 Decided: February 21, 2002 Before WIDENER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wealegbay J.G. Tayn, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Charles Matthew Keen, Sheri Lea Roberson, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Wealegbay J.G. Tayn, Sr., appeals from the district court’s judgment granting summary judgment to Walter Kidde and dismissing his employment discrimination complaint. Tayn claims he was dis- criminated against and faced a hostile work environment because of his race, national origin, and age. He further claims his dis- charge from employment was retaliatory. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Tayn v. Kidde, No. CA-00-749-1 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 30, 2001). 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