Filed: Apr. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1980 KIRK CHAPPELL, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local Union 772, Defendant – Appellee, and SCOTT FULMER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:14-cv-02153-MGL) Submitted: March 22, 2016 Decided: April 19, 2016 Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1980 KIRK CHAPPELL, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local Union 772, Defendant – Appellee, and SCOTT FULMER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:14-cv-02153-MGL) Submitted: March 22, 2016 Decided: April 19, 2016 Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1980 KIRK CHAPPELL, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local Union 772, Defendant – Appellee, and SCOTT FULMER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:14-cv-02153-MGL) Submitted: March 22, 2016 Decided: April 19, 2016 Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kirk Chappell, Appellant Pro Se. Lucas Robert Jason Aubrey, Victoria Louise Bor, SHERMAN DUNN COHEN LEIFER & YELLIG, PC, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kirk Chappell appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee on Chappell’s claims of negligence and breach of contract. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Chappell v. Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, No. 3:14-cv-02153-MGL (D.S.C. July 31, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
