Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Causey v. Randall, 04-2339 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-2339 Visitors: 15
Filed: May 12, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2339 KATHRYN FLOYD CAUSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLEMAN RANDALL, Human Resources Manager; CITY OF MYRTLE BEACH SC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Thomas E. Rogers, III, Magistrate Judge. (CA-03-1068) Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: May 12, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2339 KATHRYN FLOYD CAUSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COLEMAN RANDALL, Human Resources Manager; CITY OF MYRTLE BEACH SC, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Thomas E. Rogers, III, Magistrate Judge. (CA-03-1068) Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: May 12, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kathryn Floyd Causey, Appellant Pro Se. Vance J. Bettis, Reyburn Williams Lominack, III, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kathryn Floyd Causey appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief without prejudice in her civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge.* See Causey v. Randall, No. CA-03-1068 (D.S.C. Sept. 30, 2004). Causey’s motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense is denied. 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 proceed before the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). - 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