Filed: Apr. 30, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2360 MARLA CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00430-HEH) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marla Crawford, Appellant Pro
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2360 MARLA CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00430-HEH) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marla Crawford, Appellant Pro ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2360 MARLA CRAWFORD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00430-HEH) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marla Crawford, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Joseph Mulcunry, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marla Crawford appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her employment discrimination and retaliation claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Crawford v. Dep’t of Corr. Educ., No. 3:11-cv- 00430-HEH (E.D. Va. Nov. 29, 2011). 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
