McCoy v. Conroy

Fourth Circuit

McCoy v. Conroy

671 F. App'x 45

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 23, 2016

DocketNo. 16-6659

StatusPublished

This text of 671 F. App'x 45 (McCoy v. Conroy) 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

McCoy v. Conroy, 671 F. App'x 45 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Frankie L. McCoy, Sr., filed a lawsuit in the district court under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, claiming that the Defendants discriminated against him on account of his physical disabilities. The district court granted summary judgment to the Defendants on the ground that McCoy settled the asserted claims in a settlement agreement reached in a prior action. McCoy now appeals.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McCoy v. Conroy, No. 1:01-cv-01581-JFM (D. Md. filed Apr. 15, 2016; entered Apr. 18, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Frankie L. McCoy, Sr., filed a lawsuit in the district court under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, claiming that the Defendants discriminated against him on account of his physical disabilities. The district court granted summary judgment to the Defendants on the ground that McCoy settled the asserted claims in a settlement agreement reached in a prior action. McCoy now appeals.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McCoy v. Conroy, No. 1:01-cv-01581-JFM (D. Md. filed Apr. 15, 2016; entered Apr. 18, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

671 F. App'x 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccoy-v-conroy-ca4-2016.