UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2460
ALLEN WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO/CLC,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-01-572-1)
Submitted: August 19, 2003 Decided: April 16, 2004
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Romallus O. Murphy, Sr., Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Richard P. Rouco, WHATLEY DRAKE, LLC, Birmingham, Alabama, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Allen Williams appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment in favor of United Steelworkers of
America, AFL-CIO/CLC (“USWA”), on his complaint alleging violations
of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), 29
U.S.C. §§ 411(a)(2), 412, 529, and race discrimination in violation
of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42
U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 & Supp. 2002) and 42
U.S.C. § 1981 (2000). Williams does not raise the Title VII and
§ 1981 claims on appeal.
We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Higgins
v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 863 F.2d 1162, 1167 (4th Cir.
1988). Summary judgment is appropriate only if there are no
material facts in dispute and the moving party is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp.
v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). We view the evidence in the
light most favorable to the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986).
We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, the joint appendix,
and the district court’s order. We conclude the district court
properly concluded Williams failed to establish that removal from
the office of president of the Local union and the decision to
impose an administratorship were a direct result of his speech
against display of the Confederate flag. See Sheet Metal Workers’
- 2 -
Int’l Assoc. v. Lynn, 488 U.S. 347, 354 (1989). Accordingly, we
affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v.
United Steelworkers of Amer., AFL-CIO/CLC, No. CA-01-572-1
(M.D.N.C. Oct. 31, 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.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -