Velemirovich v. Intl Union United

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Velemirovich v. Intl Union United

Opinion

Opinions of the United 2003 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

7-22-2003

Velemirovich v. Intl Union United Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 02-2827

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003

Recommended Citation "Velemirovich v. Intl Union United" (2003). 2003 Decisions. Paper 352. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2003/352

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2003 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No: 02-2827

RICHARD L. VELEMIROVICH,

Appellant

v.

INTERNATIONAL UNION UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania D.C. Civil No. 01-cv-01775 District Judge: Hon. D. Brooks Smith

Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) July 14, 2003 McKee, Barry & Rosenn, Circuit Judges (Filed: July 22, 2003)

OPINION OF THE COURT

McKee, Circuit Judge.

Richard Velemirovich appeals the dismissal of a pro se complaint by the district

court. The district court construed his “complaint” as alleging a breach of the duty of fair

representation by the defendant union. Accordingly, the district court had subject matter

jurisdiction pursuant to

29 U.S.C. § 185

.

In its concise M emorandum Opinion and Order, the district court explained why it

was granting the union summary judgment and dismissing the aforementioned complaint. Although that memorandum is only two pages long, it adequately explains the court’s

reasoning. We conclude the court committed no error, and we affirm the court’s

dismissal substantially for the reasons set forth in its May 31, 2002 Memorandum

Opinion and Order.

TO THE CLERK:

Please file the foregoing opinion.

By the Court

/s/ Theodore A. McKee Circuit Judge

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished