Rhymer v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

9 F. App'x 88
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 1, 2001
Docket00-1564
StatusUnpublished

This text of 9 F. App'x 88 (Rhymer v. United Parcel Service, Inc.) 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
Rhymer v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 9 F. App'x 88 (4th Cir. 2001).

Opinions

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Albert Rhymer sued his former employer, United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), un[89]*89der Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 185. Rhymer does not allege that his union breached its duty of fair representation. Rhymer nonetheless argues that he has standing to sue because he claims that UPS engaged in fraud during arbitration proceedings relating to his discharge. The district court dismissed Rhymer’s suit. The court held that Rhymer lacked standing because he does not allege that his union breached its duty of fair representation. In the alternative, the court dismissed the suit because Rhymer could have discovered the fraud prior to the arbitration proceedings. After considering the briefs, the joint appendix, and the arguments of counsel, we conclude that the district court reached the correct result. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Rhymer v. United Parcel ' Service, Inc., No. 1:98CV00869 (M.D.N.C. Apr.10, 2000).

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Roni K. Dogherra v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
679 F.2d 1293 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 F. App'x 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhymer-v-united-parcel-service-inc-ca4-2001.