Phillip Smith v. Union County Board of Ed.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cv-00707-RJC-DCK. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999795355]. [15-1319]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1319 Doc: 35 Filed: 04/14/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1319 PHILLIP SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNION COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant – Appellee, and NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:13-cv-00707-RJC-DCK) Submitted: March 30, 2016 Decided: April 14, 2016 Before AGEE, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kirk J. Angel, THE ANGEL LAW FIRM, PLLC, Concord, North Carolina, for Appellant. Katherine T. Armstrong, William C. Robinson, ROBINSON, ELLIOTT & SMITH, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1319 Doc: 35 Filed: 04/14/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Phillip Smith appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Smith’s former employer in this Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) action. Smith raises two issues on appeal: (1) whether the district court improperly credited the employer’s evidence and failed to properly evaluate evidence offered by Smith regarding pre-offer medical inquiry under the ADA; and (2) evidence summary in whether the light judgment. reversible error. the We district most have court favorable reviewed failed to the to Smith in record and view key granting find no Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Union Cty. Bd. of Educ., No. 3:13-cv-00707-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C. March 5, 2015) (stating reasons on the record at the hearing on March 4, 2015); see Myers v. Hose, 50 F.3d 278, 282 (4th Cir. 1995) (finding that a litigant’s medical conditions precluded him from being a bus driver in his ADA discrimination action). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?