Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Monica Jeffries v. Gaylord Entertainment, 13-1554 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-1554 Visitors: 63
Filed: Aug. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1554 MONICA JEFFRIES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT; GAYLORD NATIONAL RESORT AND CONVENTION CENTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:10-cv-00691-PJM; 8:10-cv-02418-PJM) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 26, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpub
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1554 MONICA JEFFRIES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT; GAYLORD NATIONAL RESORT AND CONVENTION CENTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:10-cv-00691-PJM; 8:10-cv-02418-PJM) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 26, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Monica Jeffries, Appellant Pro Se. Jay Paul Holland, Levi S. Zaslow, JOSEPH, GREENWALD & LAAKE, PA, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Monica Jeffries appeals from the district court’s judgment in Defendants’ favor on her disability discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213 (West 2005 & Supp. 2013). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See Jeffries v. Gaylord Entm’t, Nos. 8:10-cv-00691- PJM, 8:10-cv-02418-PJM (D. Md. Mar. 27, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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