Willie Nichols v. Securitas Security Services USA, Incorporated, No. 23-2282 (4th Cir. 2024)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-2282 WILLIE EDWARD NICHOLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:22-cv-01665-MGL) Submitted: April 11, 2024 Decided: April 15, 2024 Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie Edward Nichols, Appellant Pro Se. Ellison F. McCoy, Frank Sanders Stern, JACKSON LEWIS PC, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Willie Edward Nichols appeals the district court’s judgment entered in Defendant’s favor after the court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendations to grant Defendant’s motions (1) to dismiss Nichols’ claims of discrimination, in violation of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213, and retaliation, in violation of the ADA, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e17, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634; and (2) for summary judgment on Nichols’ claims of race and sex discrimination, in violation of Title VII, sex discrimination, in violation of the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d), age discrimination, in violation of the ADEA, and race, sex, and age discrimination, in violation of the South Carolina Human Affairs Law. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Nichols v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc., No. 3:22-cv-01665-MGL (D.S.C. Nov. 13, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.