Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jackson v. Geren, 09-1081 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1081 Visitors: 28
Filed: May 13, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1081 JOAN E. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PETER GEREN, The Honorable, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Defendant – Appellee, v. BRIANNA SKINNER-HARRIS, Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:07-cv-00851-AW) Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: May 13, 2009 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1081 JOAN E. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PETER GEREN, The Honorable, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Defendant – Appellee, v. BRIANNA SKINNER-HARRIS, Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:07-cv-00851-AW) Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: May 13, 2009 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joan E. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Gordon, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dr. Joan E. Jackson appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Honorable Peter Geren, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, on her claim for retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jackson v. Geren, No. 8:07-cv-00851-AW (D. Md. Nov. 14, 2008). 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