Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Skinner v. Quintiles Trans Corp, 03-1450 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-1450 Visitors: 2
Filed: Dec. 05, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1450 JUDY SKINNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus QUINTILES TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-1123) Submitted: November 21, 2003 Decided: December 5, 2003 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1450 JUDY SKINNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus QUINTILES TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-1123) Submitted: November 21, 2003 Decided: December 5, 2003 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Rizk, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Rosemary G. Kenyon, Zebulon D. Anderson, Kathryn R. Valeika, SMITH, ANDERSON, BLOUNT, DORSETT, MITCHELL & JERNIGAN, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Judy Skinner appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge granting summary judgment to Defendant and dismissing Skinner’s action brought pursuant to the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Skinner v. Quintiles Transnational Corp., No. CA-02-1123 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 19, 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
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