Opinion of the Court — Moore v. Potter

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: Sept. 18, 2002
Case: Moore v. Potter
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

Charles L. Moore, a Tennessee resident proceeding pro se, appeals a district court judgment dismissing his civil complaint filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16); the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) ( 42 U.S.C. § 12111 et seq.); the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) ( 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq.); the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ( 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq.); 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 , 1983, and 1985; and 18 U.S.C. § 242 . This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Moore filed his complaint against Postmaster General Jack Potter, Walt Flanagan, and Essie J. Williams. He alleges that the United States Postal Service (“USPS”) failed to employ him because of his race, which is Indian; his handicap and disabilities, which he lists as nerves, lungs, and cancer; in reprisal for prior EEO and EEOC activity; and because of his age, which he lists as 57. In particular, Moore alleges that he had passed two postal examinations with a rating of 81.80 and 102.5, respectively. Moore…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.