Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Peterson v. Piedmont Technical, 02-1434 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-1434 Visitors: 35
Filed: Jul. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1434 BOBBIE J. PETERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PIEDMONT TECHNICAL COLLEGE; LEX D. WALTERS, Dr., President in his official and individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-4845-8) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. A
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1434 BOBBIE J. PETERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PIEDMONT TECHNICAL COLLEGE; LEX D. WALTERS, Dr., President in his official and individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-4845-8) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobbie J. Peterson, Appellant Pro Se. Charles J. Boykin, James David Pike, DUFF, DUBBERLY, TURNER, WHITE & BOYKIN, L.L.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Bobbie Peterson appeals the district court’s order dismissing Peterson’s claim of employment discrimination and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her state law claims. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Peterson v. Piedmont Technical, No. CA-01-4845-8 (D.S.C. filed Apr. 3, 2002 & entered Apr. 4, 2002). 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