Pridgen v. Department of Public Works, Bureau of Highways

Fourth Circuit

Pridgen v. Department of Public Works, Bureau of Highways

401 F. App'x 824

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 15, 2010·No. No. 09-2385·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Phillip M. Pridgen appeals the district court’s order dismissing his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pridgen v. Dep’t of Pub. Works, No. 1:08-cv-02826-WDO, 2009 WL 4726619 (D.Md. Dec. 1, 2009). We deny Pridgen’s motion for appointment of counsel as moot and 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Phillip M. Pridgen appeals the district court’s order dismissing his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pridgen v. Dep’t of Pub. Works, No. 1:08-cv-02826-WDO, 2009 WL 4726619 (D.Md. Dec. 1, 2009). We deny Pridgen’s motion for appointment of counsel as moot and 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.

Pridgen v. Department of Public Works, Bureau of Highways, 401 F. App'x 824 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

401 F. App'x 824 (Pridgen v. Department of Public Works, Bureau of Highways) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.