Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

McCreary v. Vaughn & Bassett, 07-1305 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-1305 Visitors: 22
Filed: Dec. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1305 JUDY MARIE MCCREARY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VAUGHN & BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee, and JOHN D. BASSETT, III, President/CEO, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon, Magistrate Judge. (1:05-cv-00413-WWD) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1305 JUDY MARIE MCCREARY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VAUGHN & BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee, and JOHN D. BASSETT, III, President/CEO, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Wallace W. Dixon, Magistrate Judge. (1:05-cv-00413-WWD) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Judy Marie McCreary, Appellant Pro Se. Sarah Helen Roane, OLGETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Judy Marie McCreary appeals the magistrate judge’s order dismissing her discrimination and retaliation action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as a sanction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d).* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny McCreary’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. See McCreary v. Vaughn & Bassett Furniture Co., No. 1:05-cv-00413- WWD (M.D.N.C. Mar. 21, 2007). 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 * The parties consented to exercise of jurisdiction by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). - 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