Filed: Jan. 26, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2058 TORINA A. COLLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:06-cv-01346-PJM) Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Torina A. Collis,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2058 TORINA A. COLLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:06-cv-01346-PJM) Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Torina A. Collis, A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2058
TORINA A. COLLIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
Judge. (8:06-cv-01346-PJM)
Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Torina A. Collis, Appellant Pro Se. Elena D. Marcuss,
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Torina A. Collis filed a civil action alleging she was
terminated in violation of the whistleblower provisions of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West Supp. 2009).
Collis appeals the district court’s order granting summary
judgment, for reasons stated from the bench, in favor of the
Defendant. Accordingly, we affirm. See Livingston v. Wyeth,
Inc.,
520 F.3d 344, 351 (4th Cir. 2008) (discussing elements
needed to establish a retaliation claim under the Act). 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