Maxwell v. DAK Americas

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Maxwell v. DAK Americas. Read the opinion of the Court — 216 F. App'x 315
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 13, 2007·No. 06-1068·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1068

CARL LESTER MAXWELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DAK AMERICAS; MUNDY MAINTENANCE SERVICES,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:05-cv-00141-DCN)

Submitted: January 8, 2007 Decided: February 13, 2007

Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chalmers C. Johnson, CHALMERS JOHNSON LAW FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Stacy K. Wood, PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina; Benjamin Weaver Glass, III, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Carl Lester Maxwell appeals the district court’s opinion

and order granting summary judgment to DAK Americas and Mundy

Maintenance Services and dismissing his breach of employment

contract claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Maxwell v. DAK Americas, No. 2:05-cv-00141-DCN

(D.S.C. Dec. 13, 2005). 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

- 2 -

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

Maxwell v. DAK Americas, (4th Cir. 2007).

Maxwell v. DAK Americas (Maxwell v. DAK Americas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.