Monroe v. City of Richmond
This text of Monroe v. City of Richmond (Monroe v. City of Richmond) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1221
MAX MONROE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CITY OF RICHMOND,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-03-914-3)
Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 17, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Max Monroe, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Barnett, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Max Monroe appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his civil action alleging violations of the American with
Disabilities Act. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Monroe v. City of Richmond, No.
CA-03-914-3 (E.D. Va. Feb. 2, 2004). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Monroe v. City of Richmond, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monroe-v-city-of-richmond-ca4-2004.