Larry Russell, Jr. v. Merrill Lynch ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1641
LARRY J. RUSSELL, JR.,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MERRILL LYNCH, INC.; EVANS NEVILLE; FRANK AZZARITA; DARBY
HENLEY, JR.; CHRISTOPHER DAVIS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., District Judge. (1:09-cv-00534-WO-PTS)
Submitted: October 19, 2011 Decided: November 1, 2011
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry J. Russell, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Audrey Y. Dupont,
Carole Golinski Miller, MAYNARD, COOPER & GALE, PC, Birmingham,
Alabama; James Marion Powell, WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE,
PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry J. Russell, Jr., appeals the district court’s
orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting summary judgment on his employment discrimination
claims, ordering the payment of attorney’s fees, and denying his
various motions. * We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Russell v. Merrill Lynch, No.
1:09-cv-00534-WO-PTS (M.D.N.C. Dec. 10, 2009; Feb. 1, 2010;
July 7, 2010; Mar. 31, 2011; Apr. 29, 2011). 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 Russell’s notice of appeal designates an appeal
from only the district court’s March 31, 2011 order, his intent
to appeal the district court’s various other orders is clear and
Merrill Lynch is not prejudiced by his mistaken omissions. See
Bogart v. Chapell, 396 F.3d 548, 555 (4th Cir. 2005).
2