Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

7 F.3d 224

Docket No. 92-2594.

Amezell Lilly v. Kelly Springfield Tire Company

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted: May 26, 1993. Decided: September 17, 1993.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1993-09-17

Relies on Richard Wade Kendrick v. A. A. Tumminia, Complex Administrator L. Douglas Wilder, Governor

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1993-09-17

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville.

Amezell Lilly, Appellant Pro Se.

Kimberly Jo Korando, Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, for Appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED

Before WILKINSON, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

¶1

Amezell Lilly appeals from the district court's order that granted summary judgment to the Defendants in her action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Lilly v. Kelly Springfield, No. CA-91-47-CIV-3-H (E.D.N.C. Aug. 12, 1992). 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

/7/f3d/224 · .json · Public domain