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)
09-1375•Georgette R. Asbury v. City of Roanoke
09-1375Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit04.08.2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1375
GEORGETTE R. ASBURY,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
CITY OF ROANOKE,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District
Judge. (7:08-cv-00272-gec-pms)
Submitted: July 30, 2009 Decided: August 4, 2009
Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Georgette R. Asbury, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael
Hackworth, Timothy Ross Spencer, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE,
Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Georgette R. Asbury appeals the district court’s order
granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this action
filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2006). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Asbury v. City of Roanoke, No. 7:08-cv-00272-gec-pms (W.D. Va.
Feb. 25, 2009). 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.