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)
10-1322•Erma J. Matthews v. M.c. Dean, Incorporated; Michael Dean
10-1322Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 23, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1322
ERMA J. MATTHEWS,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
M.C. DEAN, INCORPORATED; MICHAEL DEAN,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
M.C. DEAN, a/k/a Michael Dean,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00622-LMB-TRJ)
Submitted: November 5, 2010 Decided: June 23, 2011
Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Erma J. Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Manesh Kumar Rath, Robert
Austin Sheffield, KELLER & HECKMAN, Washington, D.C., for
Appellee M.C. Dean, Incorporated.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Erma J. Matthews appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court at the summary judgment hearing. Matthews v. M.C. Dean,
Inc., No. 1:09-cv-00622-LMB-TRJ (E.D. Va. Mar. 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.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.