Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    Jones v. Ukrop's Supermarkets, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Beth Jones appealed a district court's dismissal of her employment discrimination lawsuit against Ukrop's Supermarkets under Title VII. A panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling. The panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court that Jones did not establish a claim of employment discrimination. The panel dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Jones v. Ukrop's Supermarkets, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    Beth Jones appealed a district court's dismissal of her employment discrimination lawsuit against Ukrop's Supermarkets under Title VII. A panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling. The panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court that Jones did not establish a claim of employment discrimination. The panel dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-11-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-1372

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Beth Jones appealed a district court's dismissal of her employment discrimination lawsuit against Ukrop's Supermarkets under Title VII. A panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling. The panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court that Jones did not establish a claim of employment discrimination. The panel dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views2 pages

    Jones v. Ukrop's Supermarkets, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Beth Jones appealed a district court's dismissal of her employment discrimination lawsuit against Ukrop's Supermarkets under Title VII. A panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling. The panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court that Jones did not establish a claim of employment discrimination. The panel dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-1372

    BETH F. JONES,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    UKROPS SUPERMARKETS, INCORPORATED,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Henry E. Hudson, District
    Judge. (CA-04-833-3)

    Submitted:

    October 31, 2005

    Decided:

    November 21, 2005

    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert P. Geary, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Lynn F. Jacob,


    Aaron S. Walters, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Beth

    F.

    Jones

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    dismissing her civil action alleging employment discrimination


    under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    See Jones v. Ukrops Supermarkets, Inc., No. CA-04-833-3

    (E.D. Va. Feb. 23, 2005).

    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 -

    You might also like