Byrd v. Baltimore Sun Co.

Fourth Circuit

Byrd v. Baltimore Sun Co.

43 F. App'x 702

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 30, 2002

Docket01-2054

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 43 F. App'x 702 (Byrd v. Baltimore Sun Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Byrd v. Baltimore Sun Co., 43 F. App'x 702 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Karl G. Byrd, Sr., appeals from the dismissal of his employment discrimination complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000), for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court found that Byrd failed to set forth sufficient facts to establish a prima facie discrimination claim in his complaint. On appeal, Byrd argues he is not required to plead a prima facie case in his complaint, and instead must merely comply with the liberal pleading standards found in Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). He relies on a recent case, Swierkiewicz v. Sorema, 534 U.S. 506, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002), which stands for that proposition. The district court did not have the benefit of Swierkiemcz’s reasoning. Therefore, we vacate and remand for further proceedings consistent with that decision. Our decision renders moot Byrd’s motion for summary disposition, so we deny that motion. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Karl G. Byrd, Sr., appeals from the dismissal of his employment discrimination complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000), for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court found that Byrd failed to set forth sufficient facts to establish a prima facie discrimination claim in his complaint. On appeal, Byrd argues he is not required to plead a prima facie case in his complaint, and instead must merely comply with the liberal pleading standards found in Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). He relies on a recent case, Swierkiewicz v. Sorema, 534 U.S. 506, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002), which stands for that proposition. The district court did not have the benefit of Swierkiemcz’s reasoning. Therefore, we vacate and remand for further proceedings consistent with that decision. Our decision renders moot Byrd’s motion for summary disposition, so we deny that motion. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 F. App'x 702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrd-v-baltimore-sun-co-ca4-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack