Filed: Nov. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1844 AURA LABRO KARAGIANNOPOULOS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF LOWELL, Defendant- Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:14-cv-00728-GCM) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aura LaBro Kara
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1844 AURA LABRO KARAGIANNOPOULOS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF LOWELL, Defendant- Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:14-cv-00728-GCM) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aura LaBro Karag..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1844 AURA LABRO KARAGIANNOPOULOS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF LOWELL, Defendant- Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:14-cv-00728-GCM) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aura LaBro Karagiannopoulos, Appellant Pro Se. Martha Raymond Thompson, SCOTT, HOLLOWELL, PALMER & WINDHAM, Gastonia, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Aura LaBro Karagiannopoulos appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing her complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Karagiannopoulos v. City of Lowell, No. 3:14-cv-00728-GCM (W.D.N.C. July 17, 2015). 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
