Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Ass'n

Fourth Circuit

Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Ass'n

166 F. App'x 79

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Ass'n. Read the opinion of the Court — 120 F. App'x 453 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 10, 2006·No. No. 05-1941·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

William A. Taccino appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in this civil action alleging breach of the duty of fair representation. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Assoc., No. CA-03-2373-1-JFM [80]*80(D.Md. July 19, 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

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

PER CURIAM:

William A. Taccino appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in this civil action alleging breach of the duty of fair representation. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Assoc., No. CA-03-2373-1-JFM [80]*80(D.Md. July 19, 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

Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Ass'n, 166 F. App'x 79 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

166 F. App'x 79 (Taccino v. National Rural Letter Carriers Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.