Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Taylor v. State of MD, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of James W. Taylor et al. v. State of Maryland et al. affirming the lower district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' employment discrimination and related state law claims. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Taylor v. State of MD, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of James W. Taylor et al. v. State of Maryland et al. affirming the lower district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' employment discrimination and related state law claims. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-02-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-2032

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of James W. Taylor et al. v. State of Maryland et al. affirming the lower district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' employment discrimination and related state law claims. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    8 views2 pages

    Taylor v. State of MD, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of James W. Taylor et al. v. State of Maryland et al. affirming the lower district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' employment discrimination and related state law claims. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 99-2032

    JAMES W. TAYLOR; LARRY W. SHOCKLEY; DANIEL L.


    THOMSON; SAMUEL HOMER; GERALD W. LONG,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    STATE OF MARYLAND; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
    AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICE DIVISION OF CORRECTION POPLAR HILL PRE-RELEASE UNIT; SHIRLEY
    WASHINGTON-WORTHY,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Williams M. Nickerson, District Judge.
    (CA-98-4120-WMN)

    Submitted:

    January 31, 2000

    Decided:

    February 22, 2000

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Paul V. Bennett, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellants. J. Joseph
    Curran, Jr., Attorney General of Maryland, Scott S. Oakley, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellants Taylor, Shockley, Thomson, Homer and Long appeal
    the district courts order dismissing their complaint alleging
    employment discrimination and related state law claims.

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no
    reversible error.
    district court.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the


    See Taylor v. State of Maryland, No. CA-98-4120-

    WMN (D. Md. July 1, 1999).*

    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

    Although the order from which Appellants appeal was filed on


    June 30, 1999, it was entered on the district courts docket sheet
    on July 1, 1999. July 1, 1999, is therefore the effective date of
    the district courts decision. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a);
    see also Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
    2

    You might also like