Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lawson v. Principi, Sec, 01-2059 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-2059 Visitors: 21
Filed: Jan. 14, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2059 BERTHA R. LAWSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant - Appellee, and HERSHEL GOBER, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-851-7) Submitted: December 17, 2001 Decided: J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2059 BERTHA R. LAWSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant - Appellee, and HERSHEL GOBER, Acting Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-851-7) Submitted: December 17, 2001 Decided: January 14, 2002 Before LUTTIG and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bertha R. Lawson, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Corcoran, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Bertha Ruth Lawson appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on her claims of discrimination 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 1994 & Supp. 2001), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 701-797 (West 1999 & Supp. 2001), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101-12213 (West 1995 & Supp. 2001). 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. Lawson v. Principi, No. CA-00-851-7 (W.D. Va. Aug. 21, 2001). 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