Filed: Jun. 30, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1314 PAMELA BRUNNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:06- cv-02336-JFM) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: June 30, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pamela Brunn
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1314 PAMELA BRUNNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:06- cv-02336-JFM) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: June 30, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pamela Brunne..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1314 PAMELA BRUNNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:06- cv-02336-JFM) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: June 30, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pamela Brunner, Appellant Pro Se. Judith S. Bresler, Eric Charles Brousaides, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pamela Brunner appeals the district court’s order dismissing her claims of employment discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Brunner v. Montgomery County Pub. Sch., No: 1:06-cv-02336-JFM (D. Md. Feb. 19, 2008). We deny Appellee’s motion to strike Brunner’s reply brief. We also deny Brunner’s motion to supplement her reply brief. 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 -
