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)
10-2398•Marilyn Crowley v. Pinebrook, Incorporated
10-2398Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 21, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2398
MARILYN CROWLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PINEBROOK, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Jillyn K. Schulze, Magistrate Judge.
(8:08-cv-03427-JKS)
Submitted: July 12, 2011 Decided: July 21, 2011
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marilyn Crowley, Appellant Pro Se. Heidi Elizabeth Dudderar,
LAW OFFICES OF HEIDI E. DUDDERAR, PC, California, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Marilyn Crowley appeals the district court’s order*
granting summary judgment and denying her claim that her
employment was terminated in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.A.
§§ 2000e-2000e-17 (West Supp. 2010) and the Jury System
Improvement Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1875 (2006). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Crowley v.
Pinebrook, Inc., No. 8:08-cv-03427-JKS (D. Md. Dec. 1, 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
* The parties consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by
the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.