UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2542
ROY C. HUDSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
MARK K. HUDSON,
Party in Interest,
versus
CASE FARMS OF NORTH CAROLINA, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Shelby. Lacy H. Thornburg, District
Judge. (CA-97-247-4)
Submitted: April 20, 1999 Decided: August 6, 1999
Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Phyllis A. Palmieri, Morganton, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Terry A. Clark, Harley H. Jones, EDWARDS, BALLARD, CLARK, BARRETT
& CARLSON, P.A., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Roy C. Hudson appeals from the district court order
granting summary judgment in favor of his former employer, Case
Farms of North Carolina, Inc. (“Case”), in his employment discrim-
ination action filed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
(ADEA), 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621-634 (West Supp. 1999). Finding no
error, we affirm. Even assuming that Hudson could make out a prima
facie case of age discrimination, Hudson fails to rebut Case’s
legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for declining to allow him
to remain Assistant Hatchery Manager. See O’Connor v. Consolidated
Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308, 310-13 (1996); Vaughan v.
MetraHealth Cos., 145 F.3d 197, 200-02 (4th Cir. 1998). Hudson’s
state law claim of employment discrimination was likewise properly
dismissed. See Henson v. Liggett Group, Inc., 61 F.3d 270, 277
(4th Cir. 1995).
We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.
Because the facts and legal contentions are adequately set forth in
the materials before the court and argument will not aid the deci-
sional process, we grant Case’s motion to submit the case on the
briefs.
AFFIRMED
2