Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
02-1146•Carolyn Bandy v. Sprint Mid-Atlantic Telecom, Incorporated
02-1146Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit23.07.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1146
CAROLYN BANDY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SPRINT MID-ATLANTIC TELECOM, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (CA-00-819-5-F)
Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 23, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carolyn Bandy, Appellant Pro Se. Zebulon Dyer Anderson, SMITH,
ANDERSON, BLOUNT, DORSETT, MITCHELL & JERNIGAN, Raleigh, North
Carolina; Thomas Blumeyer Weaver, ARMSTRONG, TEASDALE, SCHLAFLY &
DAVIS, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Carolyn Bandy appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment to the Defendant on Bandy’s action alleging race
discrimination and retaliatory harassment. We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Bandy v. Spring Mid-Atlantic Telecom, Inc., No. CA-00-
819-5-F (E.D.N.C. Jan. 2, 2002). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.