Altizer v. City of Roanoke
This text of Altizer v. City of Roanoke (Altizer v. City of Roanoke) 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UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1429
SCOTT B. ALTIZER; J. RICHARD DREWERY; SUSAN A. CAMPER,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
CITY OF ROANOKE,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District ov Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-484-7)
Submitted: October 3, 2003 Decided: October 22, 2003
Before WIDENER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terry N. Grimes, TERRY N. GRIMES, ESQ., P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellants. William M. Hackwork, Elizabeth K. Dillon, CITY OF ROANOKE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Scott B. Altizer, J. Richard Drewery, and Susan A. Camper
appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to
Defendant in this Title VII action alleging discriminatory failure
to promote. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Altizer v. City of Roanoke, No. CA-02-484-7
(W.D. Va. Mary 21, 2003). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Altizer v. City of Roanoke, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/altizer-v-city-of-roanoke-ca4-2003.