BUCKNER v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., 15-2304. (2016)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20160321073
Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 2016
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM Christopher Eugene Buckner filed a civil action in state court against United Parcel Service, Inc., and Teamsters Local 391, asserting various violations of North Carolina law. The district court determined that Buckner's claims were preempted under the Labor Management Relations Act and that removal to federal court was therefore proper. Buckner now appeals the district court's order accepting in part a
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM Christopher Eugene Buckner filed a civil action in state court against United Parcel Service, Inc., and Teamsters Local 391, asserting various violations of North Carolina law. The district court determined that Buckner's claims were preempted under the Labor Management Relations Act and that removal to federal court was therefore proper. Buckner now appeals the district court's order accepting in part an..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Christopher Eugene Buckner filed a civil action in state court against United Parcel Service, Inc., and Teamsters Local 391, asserting various violations of North Carolina law. The district court determined that Buckner's claims were preempted under the Labor Management Relations Act and that removal to federal court was therefore proper. Buckner now appeals the district court's order accepting in part and denying in part the magistrate judge's recommendation, denying Buckner's motion to remand, dismissing some claims with prejudice as barred by res judicata and the statute of limitations, and dismissing his remaining claims without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Buckner v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., No. 5:14-cv-00539-FL (E.D.N.C. Sept. 23, 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.
Source: Leagle
