Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Emma Howard v. Unc Healthcare System, 11-1285 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 11-1285 Visitors: 47
Filed: Aug. 29, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1285 EMMA VICTORIA HOWARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; NORMAN KLASE, Human Resource Manager In His Official Capacity; SUSAN PHILLIPS, Vice President For Surgical Services, Individually and In Her Official Capacity; PATT STURDIVANT, Chief Anesthesia Technician, Individually and In Her Official Capacity; GAIL WALKER, Team-Leader For Anesthesia Technicians & Central Supply Technicians, Individually and In
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1285 EMMA VICTORIA HOWARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; NORMAN KLASE, Human Resource Manager In His Official Capacity; SUSAN PHILLIPS, Vice President For Surgical Services, Individually and In Her Official Capacity; PATT STURDIVANT, Chief Anesthesia Technician, Individually and In Her Official Capacity; GAIL WALKER, Team-Leader For Anesthesia Technicians & Central Supply Technicians, Individually and In Her Official Capacity; BONNIE OVERMAN, American Disability Agent & Equal Employment Opportunity Agent, Individually and In Her Official Capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:10-cv-00047-WO-PTS) Submitted: August 25, 2011 Decided: August 29, 2011 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emma Victoria Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Celia Grasty Lata, UNC HOSPITALS/UNC HEALTH CARE, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Emma Victoria Howard appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Howard v. UNC Healthcare Sys., No. 1:10-cv-00047-WO-PTS (M.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 2011). 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
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