Filed: Dec. 16, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1884 BRUCE A. CRENSHAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 322, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-794) Submitted: November 14, 2003 Decided: December 16, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1884 BRUCE A. CRENSHAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 322, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-794) Submitted: November 14, 2003 Decided: December 16, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce A...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1884 BRUCE A. CRENSHAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 322, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-794) Submitted: November 14, 2003 Decided: December 16, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce A. Crenshaw, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Gans Axelrod, BEINS, AXELROD, KRAFT, GLEASON & GIBSON, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Bruce A. Crenshaw appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Crenshaw v. Warehouse Employees Union, Local 322, No. CA-02-794 (E.D. Va. July 15, 2003). 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
