Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Monroe v. City of Richmond, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished United States Court of Appeals case. Max Monroe appealed a district court ruling denying relief on his civil action alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act against the City of Richmond. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The Court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-08-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-1221

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished United States Court of Appeals case. Max Monroe appealed a district court ruling denying relief on his civil action alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act against the City of Richmond. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The Court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    Monroe v. City of Richmond, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished United States Court of Appeals case. Max Monroe appealed a district court ruling denying relief on his civil action alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act against the City of Richmond. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The Court dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED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,


    ATTORNEYS OFFICE, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    CITY

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Max Monroe appeals the district courts 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.

    CA-03-914-3 (E.D. Va. Feb. 2, 2004).

    City

    of

    Richmond,

    No.

    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 -

    You might also like