Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Stanley Perrin v. Commissioner of Public Works, 108 F.3d 1373, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views1 page
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a lower court ruling in favor of the Defendant in a case where the Plaintiff, Stanley Perrin, alleged racially discriminatory discharge from his job in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit provided no oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-03-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 108 F.3d 1373 Docket: 96-1471

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a lower court ruling in favor of the Defendant in a case where the Plaintiff, Stanley Perrin, alleged racially discriminatory discharge from his job in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit provided no oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    16 views1 page

    Stanley Perrin v. Commissioner of Public Works, 108 F.3d 1373, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a lower court ruling in favor of the Defendant in a case where the Plaintiff, Stanley Perrin, alleged racially discriminatory discharge from his job in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit provided no oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 1

    108 F.

    3d 1373

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


    of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Stanley PERRIN, Plaintiff--Appellant,
    v.
    COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 96-1471.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Feb. 27, 1997.
    Decided March 10, 1997.

    Stanley Perrin, Appellant Pro Se. Vance J. Bettis, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ


    & BETTIS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals the district court's order entering judgment in favor of


    Defendant in this action alleging racially discriminatory discharge in violation
    of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. We have reviewed the
    record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the
    magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. Perrin v. Commissioner of Pub. Works, No. CA95-2021-8-20AK (D.S.C. Mar. 27, 1996). 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.

    You might also like