Anderson v. Jacko

537 F. App'x 210
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedAugust 6, 2013
DocketNo. 13-1340
StatusPublished

This text of 537 F. App'x 210 (Anderson v. Jacko) 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
Anderson v. Jacko, 537 F. App'x 210 (4th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Charmaine L. Anderson appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing her employment discrimination complaint, denying her Fed.R.Civ.P. 59 motion for reconsideration, and denying her subsequent motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Anderson v. Jacho, No. 8-11-cv-01370-JFM (D.Md. Jan. 11, 2013). In addition, we note that Anderson has waived certain claims by failing to raise them in her informal brief, see Wahi v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc., 562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir.2009), and has waived other claims by raising them for the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir.1993). 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

D.P. Muth J.P. Muth v. United States
1 F.3d 246 (Fourth Circuit, 1993)
Wahi v. Charleston Area Medical Center, Inc.
562 F.3d 599 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
537 F. App'x 210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-jacko-ca4-2013.