Adrienne McAdory v. Vail Technologies
This text of 695 F. App'x 730 (Adrienne McAdory v. Vail Technologies) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Adrienne L. McAdory appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Vail Technologies (“Vail”) on McA-dory’s pregnancy discrimination claim. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because McAdor/s informal brief does not challenge the district court’s alternative holdings that she failed to establish her prima facie case or that Vail’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating the subcontract was a pretext for discrimination, McAdory has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Brown v. Nucor Corp., 785 F.3d 895, 918 (4th Cir. 2015); Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
695 F. App'x 730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adrienne-mcadory-v-vail-technologies-ca4-2017.