Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Daughety v. Geren, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Joan Daughety appealed the dismissal of her discriminatory discharge claims under Title VII. The magistrate judge granted summary judgment to the defendant. The appellate court found no reversible error, as a prior jury had found the employer's stated non-discriminatory reasons for disciplining Daughety were valid. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling dismissing the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-12-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-1337

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Joan Daughety appealed the dismissal of her discriminatory discharge claims under Title VII. The magistrate judge granted summary judgment to the defendant. The appellate court found no reversible error, as a prior jury had found the employer's stated non-discriminatory reasons for disciplining Daughety were valid. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views3 pages

    Daughety v. Geren, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Joan Daughety appealed the dismissal of her discriminatory discharge claims under Title VII. The magistrate judge granted summary judgment to the defendant. The appellate court found no reversible error, as a prior jury had found the employer's stated non-discriminatory reasons for disciplining Daughety were valid. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling dismissing the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-1337

    JOAN C. DAUGHETY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    PETE GEREN, Secretary, U.S. Department of the
    Army; MICHAEL STEWART, Colonel; JOHN IVES,
    Installation Commander,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    --------------------------------------------THE METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
    ASSOCIATION,
    Amicus Supporting Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Charles B. Day, Magistrate Judge. (8:04cv-02114-CBD)

    Submitted:

    December 12, 2007

    Decided:

    December 28, 2007

    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Joel P. Bennett, LAW OFFICES OF JOEL P. BENNETT, P.C., Washington,


    D.C., for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney,
    Ariana Wright Arnold, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore,

    Maryland, for Appellee.


    Stephen Z. Chertkof, HELLER, HURON,
    CHERTKOF, LERNER, SIMON & SALZMAN, Washington, D.C., for Amicus
    Supporting Appellant.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Joan C. Daughety appeals the magistrate judges* order
    granting Defendants summary judgment motion on her discriminatory
    discharge claims brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights
    Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e to 2000e-17 (2000).
    See Daughety v. Geren, No. 8:04-cv-02114-CBD (D. Md. filed March
    20, 2006; entered March 21, 2006).
    find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and

    The jurys finding that the Defendants

    proffered non-discriminatory reasons motivated its progressive


    discipline of Daughety -- precludes Daughetys appellate challenge
    of discriminatory discharge.
    of the magistrate judge.

    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment

    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

    The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate


    judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c) (2000).
    - 3 -

    You might also like