Walls v. Dillon County Detention Center

Fourth Circuit

Walls v. Dillon County Detention Center

612 F. App'x 696

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 24, 2015

DocketNo. 15-1327

StatusPublished

This text of 612 F. App'x 696 (Walls v. Dillon County Detention Center) 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

Walls v. Dillon County Detention Center, 612 F. App'x 696 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

[697]*697Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Evalina Walls appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge as modified and dismissing Walls’ Title VII sex and retaliation discrimination claims without prejudice and dismissing the remainder of the employment discrimination and state law claims with prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Walls v. Dillon Cty. Del. Ctr., No. 4:13-cv-02551-RBH, 2015 WL 1145231 (D.S.C. Mar. 13, 2015). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

[697]*697Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Evalina Walls appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge as modified and dismissing Walls’ Title VII sex and retaliation discrimination claims without prejudice and dismissing the remainder of the employment discrimination and state law claims with prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Walls v. Dillon Cty. Del. Ctr., No. 4:13-cv-02551-RBH, 2015 WL 1145231 (D.S.C. Mar. 13, 2015). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

612 F. App'x 696, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walls-v-dillon-county-detention-center-ca4-2015.