Jeffrey P. Corbin v. Federal Express, No. 17-2347 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2347 JEFFREY P. CORBIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS, d/b/a FedEx, Defendant - Appellee, and MARK CLATTERBUCK, Manager Fleet Maintenance; TOM SCOTT, Sr. Technician, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert John Krask, Magistrate Judge. (4:15-cv-00139-RJK) Submitted: March 27, 2018 Decided: April 3, 2018 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey P. Corbin, Appellant Pro Se. Ursula Yvette Holmes, Patrick Daniel Riederer, Catherine C. Walsh, FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, Memphis, Tennessee; Michael R. Ward, Gibson Sinclair Wright, MCCANDLISH HOLTON, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Jeffrey P. Corbin appeals from the judgment entered by the magistrate judge * in his civil action for discrimination on the basis of race and disability. The November 3, 2017, judgment was entered in accordance with the jury’s verdict in favor of Federal Express following a trial and the magistrate judge’s May 19, 2017, order granting in part and denying in part Federal Express’s motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the magistrate judge’s order and judgment. Corbin v. Fed. Express, No. 4:15-cv-00139-RJK (E.D. Va. May 19 & Nov. 3, 2017). 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 * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012). 3

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.