Filed: Oct. 22, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1429 SCOTT B. ALTIZER; J. RICHARD DREWERY; SUSAN A. CAMPER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CITY OF ROANOKE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District ov Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-484-7) Submitted: October 3, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003 Before WIDENER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1429 SCOTT B. ALTIZER; J. RICHARD DREWERY; SUSAN A. CAMPER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CITY OF ROANOKE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District ov Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-484-7) Submitted: October 3, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003 Before WIDENER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1429 SCOTT B. ALTIZER; J. RICHARD DREWERY; SUSAN A. CAMPER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CITY OF ROANOKE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District ov Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-484-7) Submitted: October 3, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003 Before WIDENER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terry N. Grimes, TERRY N. GRIMES, ESQ., P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellants. William M. Hackwork, Elizabeth K. Dillon, CITY OF ROANOKE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Scott B. Altizer, J. Richard Drewery, and Susan A. Camper appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in this Title VII action alleging discriminatory failure to promote. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Altizer v. City of Roanoke, No. CA-02-484-7 (W.D. Va. Mary 21, 2003). 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