Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Schneider v. Bentsen, 99-10183 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 99-10183 Visitors: 37
Filed: Aug. 06, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-10183 Summary Calendar _ VERNON L. SCHNEIDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LLOYD M. BENTSEN, Secretary, Department of Treasury; NICHOLAS BRADY, Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (3:97-CV-2783-X) _ August 4, 1999 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Vernon L. Schneider, pro se, appeals the dismissal of his employment discrimination claims
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 99-10183 Summary Calendar _____________________ VERNON L. SCHNEIDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LLOYD M. BENTSEN, Secretary, Department of Treasury; NICHOLAS BRADY, Defendants-Appellees. _________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (3:97-CV-2783-X) _________________________________________________________________ August 4, 1999 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Vernon L. Schneider, pro se, appeals the dismissal of his employment discrimination claims arising out of the termination of his employment with the Internal Revenue Service, the denial of his motions for leave to amend his complaint, and the denial of his motion for reconsideration. Schneider contends that the district court erred by holding that his complaint was not timely filed and that he had not exhausted administrative remedies. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Pursuant to our review of the record and briefs, we conclude that the district court did not commit reversible error by dismissing the complaint, denying leave to amend, and denying reconsideration. Accordingly, the judgment and orders appealed from are AFFIRMED. (Schneider’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.) 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