Peggy H. Davis v. Arlington County Board of Education Arthur W. Gosling Margaret McCount Dirner

Fourth Circuit

Peggy H. Davis v. Arlington County Board of Education Arthur W. Gosling Margaret McCount Dirner

23 F.3d 400, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18459, 1994 WL 168469

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 4, 1994

Docket92-1463

StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 400 (Peggy H. Davis v. Arlington County Board of Education Arthur W. Gosling Margaret McCount Dirner) 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

Peggy H. Davis v. Arlington County Board of Education Arthur W. Gosling Margaret McCount Dirner, 23 F.3d 400, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18459, 1994 WL 168469 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

23 F.3d 400
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Peggy H. DAVIS, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
ARLINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; Arthur W. Gosling;
Margaret McCount Dirner, Defendants Appellees.

No. 92-1463.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 30, 1993.
Decided: May 4, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CA-91-1692-A).

Glenwood P. Roane, McLean, Virginia; Maxine Bethel Cade, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.

Scott S. Cairns, David F. Dabbs, McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe, Richmond, VA; Peter H. Maier, Asst. Co. Atty., Arlington, VA, for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Peggy H. Davis appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants in her action alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C.A. Secs. 621-634 (West 1985 & Supp.1992), and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.A. Secs. 2000e to -17 (West 1981 & Supp.1992). We find after our review of the record on appeal and the parties' briefs that any assignments of error that Davis may have raised on appeal are without merit and we grant the Appellees' motion for summary affirmance pursuant to 4th Cir. I.O.P. 27.6. Davis failed to show that any genuine issue of material fact existed, when opposing the Defendants' summary judgment motion, and our review convinces us that the Defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

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.

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

23 F.3d 400
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Peggy H. DAVIS, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
ARLINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; Arthur W. Gosling;
Margaret McCount Dirner, Defendants Appellees.

No. 92-1463.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 30, 1993.
Decided: May 4, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CA-91-1692-A).

Glenwood P. Roane, McLean, Virginia; Maxine Bethel Cade, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.

Scott S. Cairns, David F. Dabbs, McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe, Richmond, VA; Peter H. Maier, Asst. Co. Atty., Arlington, VA, for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Peggy H. Davis appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Defendants in her action alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C.A. Secs. 621-634 (West 1985 & Supp.1992), and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.A. Secs. 2000e to -17 (West 1981 & Supp.1992). We find after our review of the record on appeal and the parties' briefs that any assignments of error that Davis may have raised on appeal are without merit and we grant the Appellees' motion for summary affirmance pursuant to 4th Cir. I.O.P. 27.6. Davis failed to show that any genuine issue of material fact existed, when opposing the Defendants' summary judgment motion, and our review convinces us that the Defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 F.3d 400, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18459, 1994 WL 168469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peggy-h-davis-v-arlington-county-board-of-educatio-ca4-1994.