Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Thelma L. Gibson v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services, 91-1527 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-1527 Visitors: 38
Filed: Aug. 11, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 972 F.2d 339 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Thelma L. GIBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-1527. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: May 15, 1992 Decided: August 11, 1992
More

972 F.2d 339

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Thelma L. GIBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-1527.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 15, 1992
Decided: August 11, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-90-936-A)

Thelma L. Gibson, Appellant Pro Se.

Richard Parker, Robert James Kelley, Jr., Office of The United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

Affirmed.

Before HALL and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Thelma L. Gibson appeals from the district court's order denying her relief at trial on her Title VII complaint. Our review of the entire record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gibson v. Sullivan, No. CA-90-936-A (E.D. Va. Feb. 20, 1991). 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

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