The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-1846•Freda Hogue v. Sam’s Club
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1846
FREDA HOGUE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SAM’S CLUB; TOM GRIMMS, President/CEO of Sam’s
Club; WALMART AND MCLANE COMPANY; DAVID GLASS,
President/CEO of Walmart and McLane Company;
DARREN WHITLOCK,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
(CA-99-1893-AW)
Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: January 25, 2002
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Freda Hogue, Appellant Pro Se. Dru E. Cessna, Ranae Bartlett, WAL-
MART STORES, INC., Bentonville, Arkansas; Jeffrey Elliot Rockman,
Eileen Carr Riley, SEROTTE, ROCKMAN & WESCOTT, P.A., Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Freda Hogue appeals the district court’s order denying her
motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial follow-
ing a jury verdict unfavorable to her in her employment discrim-
ination action. 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. Hogue v. Sam’s
Club, No. CA-99-1893-AW (D. Md. May 23, 2001). We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.