Akers v. Highlands Community Services Board

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 18, 2011
Docket10-1198
StatusUnpublished

This text of Akers v. Highlands Community Services Board (Akers v. Highlands Community Services Board) 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.

Bluebook
Akers v. Highlands Community Services Board, (4th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1198

APRIL EDWINA SPARKS AKERS,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

JEFFREY FOX, Executive Director of Highlands Community Services; WASHINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA; CITY OF BRISTOL, VIRGINIA,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00039-jpj-pms)

Submitted: February 9, 2011 Decided: March 18, 2011

Before MOTZ, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

E. Gay Leonard, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellant. Henry Keuling-Stout, KEULING-STOUT, PC, Big Stone Gap, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

April Edwina Sparks Akers appeals the district court's

judgment granting Defendant’s summary judgment motion on her

sexual harassment, sex discrimination, and retaliation claims,

brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp.

2010). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Akers v. Highlands Cmty. Servs. Bd., No.

1:08-cv-00039-jpj-pms (W.D. Va. Jan. 15, 2010). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Akers v. Highlands Community Services Board, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akers-v-highlands-community-services-board-ca4-2011.