Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jackson v. American Healthways Government, 09-2049 (2010)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-2049 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 26, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2049 CHARMAINE DENISE JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. AMERICAN HEALTHWAYS GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC.; AMERICAN HEALTHWAY SERVICES, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:07-cv-03244-PJM) Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2049 CHARMAINE DENISE JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. AMERICAN HEALTHWAYS GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC.; AMERICAN HEALTHWAY SERVICES, INC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:07-cv-03244-PJM) Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charmaine Denise Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Peter Woodward Sheehan, Melissa Menkel Shorey, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charmaine Denise Jackson appeals the district court’s orders granting Appellees’ motion for summary judgment and denying Appellant’s motions for counsel and to reopen discovery. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jackson v. Am. Healthways Gov’t Servs., Inc., No. 8:07- cv-03244-PJM (D. Md. Aug. 12, 2009). 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