Jackie Jimoh v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Inc.

10-1636Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit13.05.2011

Gesamter Gesetzestext

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1636
JACKIE JIMOH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG HOUSING PARTNERSHIP, INC.,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-00495-RJC-DCK)
Submitted: April 27, 2011 Decided: May 13, 2011
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Angela Gray, GRAY NEWELL, LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Charles E. Johnson, Allyson Pierce Lawless,
ROBINSON, BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jackie Jimoh appeals the district court’s order
granting the Charlotte Mecklenburg Housing Partnership,
Incorporated’s motion for summary judgment on Jimoh’s claims of
discrimination on the basis of age, race and sex, and
retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003
& Supp. 2010), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967,
as amended, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621-34 (West 2006 & Supp. 2010), and
42 U.S.C. § 1981 (2006).*
AFFIRMED
We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated in the district court’s order and judgment. Jimoh v.
Charlotte Mecklenburg Hous. P’Ship, Inc., No. 3:08-cv-00495-RJC-
DCK (W.D.N.C. May 12, 2010). 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.
* Jimoh has failed to brief, and has therefore abandoned,
her state-law claims for intentional and negligent infliction of
emotional distress, negligent supervision and retention of an
employee, and breach of contract. See Wahi v. Charleston Area
Med. Ctr., Inc., 562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir. 2009), cert.
denied, 130 S. Ct. 1140 (2010).

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.