Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Chandra v. Medical College VA, 99-2481 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-2481 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 24, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2481 RITU CHANDRA, M.D., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA; VIRGINIA COMMON- WEALTH UNIVERSITY; RICHARD BROOKMAN, M.D.; ROBIN FOSTER, M.D., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-99-55-3) Submitted: June 9, 2000 Decided: July 24, 2000 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HA
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2481 RITU CHANDRA, M.D., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA; VIRGINIA COMMON- WEALTH UNIVERSITY; RICHARD BROOKMAN, M.D.; ROBIN FOSTER, M.D., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-99-55-3) Submitted: June 9, 2000 Decided: July 24, 2000 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ritu Chandra, Appellant Pro Se. Guy Winston Horsley, Jr., Assis- tant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ritu Chandra appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Medical College of Virginia (“MCV”) and other defendants in her civil action alleging she was improperly discharged from MCV’s residency program due to her race and national origin. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Chandra v. Medical College of Virginia, No. CA-99-55-3 (E.D. Va. Oct. 4, 1999). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer