Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jones v. NC Dept of Human Res, 01-1317 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-1317 Visitors: 57
Filed: Aug. 29, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1317 JANET W. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, Division of Mental Health, Developmental Dis- abilities and Substance Abuse Services, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-99-833-5-BR) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1317 JANET W. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, Division of Mental Health, Developmental Dis- abilities and Substance Abuse Services, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-99-833-5-BR) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Janet W. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Dorothy Powers, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Janet W. Jones appeals the district court’s order granting Appellee’s motion for summary judgment in her employment discrim- ination action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jones v. North Carolina Dep’t of Human Resources, No. CA-99-833-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Feb. 14, 2001). 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