Smith v. Woodbourne Center ( 1999 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-2218
ERIC D. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WOODBOURNE CENTER, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-99-
598-AMD)
Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 21, 1999
Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric D. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Silvestri, Ray-
mond Charles Baldwin, MILES & STOCKBRIDGE, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Eric D. Smith appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment to the Defendant and dismissing his employment
discrimination claim as time-barred. We have reviewed the record
and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Smith v. Woodbourne Ctr., Inc., No. CA-99-598-AMD (D. Md. July 27,
1999).* 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
*
Although the district court's order is dated July 26, 1999,
the district court's records show that it was entered on the docket
sheet on July 27, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was
physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district court's decision. See Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2