Filed: Aug. 23, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1246 JUANITA NELSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RONNIE HINMAN; LARRY TYLER; THE CRISFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT, Inc.; CHARLES CAVANAUGH, Defendants – Appellees, and CITY OF CRISFIELD, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge. (1:10-cv-01816-BEL) Submitted: August 8, 2012 Decided: August 23, 2012 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1246 JUANITA NELSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RONNIE HINMAN; LARRY TYLER; THE CRISFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT, Inc.; CHARLES CAVANAUGH, Defendants – Appellees, and CITY OF CRISFIELD, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge. (1:10-cv-01816-BEL) Submitted: August 8, 2012 Decided: August 23, 2012 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1246
JUANITA NELSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
RONNIE HINMAN; LARRY TYLER; THE CRISFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT,
Inc.; CHARLES CAVANAUGH,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
CITY OF CRISFIELD,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge.
(1:10-cv-01816-BEL)
Submitted: August 8, 2012 Decided: August 23, 2012
Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Luke A. Rommel, OTWAY, RUSSO & ROMMEL, PC, Salisbury, Maryland,
for Appellant. Kevin B. Karpinski, Victoria M. Shearer,
KARPINSKI, COLARESI & KARP, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Juanita Nelson appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellees on Nelson’s
claims of gender discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006).
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Nelson v. Hinman, No. 1:10-cv-01816-BEL (D. Md. Feb. 6,
2012). 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
3