Graham v. Diabetes Self Care, Inc.

22 F. App'x 265
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 12, 2001
DocketNos. 01-1415, 01-1416
StatusPublished

This text of 22 F. App'x 265 (Graham v. Diabetes Self Care, Inc.) 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
Graham v. Diabetes Self Care, Inc., 22 F. App'x 265 (4th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated cases, Tammy J. Graham and Karen R. Barger sued Diabetes Self Care, Inc. (DSC), their former employer. Graham alleged violation of the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 206(d)(1) (West 1998). Barger alleged violation of the Equal Pay Act; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621-634 (West 1999 & Supp.2001); and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 & Supp.2001). The district court granted summary judgment to DSC in both actions. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court in each case. United States v. Graham, No. CA-98-633-7 (W.D.Va. filed Feb. 20, 2001; entered Feb. 21, 2001); United States v. Barger, No. CA-98-785-7 (W-D.Va. filed Feb. 20, 2001; entered Feb. 21, 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.

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

Related

Minimum wage
29 U.S.C. § 206(d)(1)
§ 621-634
29 U.S.C. § 621-634
Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 F. App'x 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-diabetes-self-care-inc-ca4-2001.