Branch v. City of Richmond

Fourth Circuit

Branch v. City of Richmond

36 F. App'x 536

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 17, 2002·No. 02-1047·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Cathy B. Branch appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing Branch’s employment discrimination action. * We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and find no *537 reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Branch v. City of Richmond, No. CA-01-366-3 (E.D.Va. Dec. 4, 2001). 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.

*

The magistrate judge had jurisdiction to enter a final order pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(c) (West 1993 & Supp.2001).

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

PER CURIAM.

Cathy B. Branch appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing Branch’s employment discrimination action. * We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and find no *537 reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Branch v. City of Richmond, No. CA-01-366-3 (E.D.Va. Dec. 4, 2001). 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.

*

The magistrate judge had jurisdiction to enter a final order pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(c) (West 1993 & Supp.2001).

Branch v. City of Richmond, 36 F. App'x 536 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

36 F. App'x 536 (Branch v. City of Richmond) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related