Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

88 F. App'x 664

Nance v. Potter

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided March 2, 2004

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2004-03-02

Relies on Nance v. Potter

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2004-03-02

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Ronald I. Nance appeals from the district court’s order awarding summary judgment to the Postal Service on his employment discrimination complaint. Our review of the record, the parties’ briefs, and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. The doctrine of res judicata bars the only claim Nance advances on appeal—a claim of Rehabilitation Act discrimination. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nance v. Potter, No. CA-01-1083-1, 225 F.Supp.2d 638 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 1, 2002). 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.

¶2 AFFIRMED

/88/fappx/664 · .json · Public domain