Arrington v. Cocklin
Opinion of the Court
Charlene Arrington appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment for the Defendants on her racial discrimination and retaliation action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Arrington v. Cocklin, No. CA-02-655-H (E.D.N.C. Mar. 30, 2004). 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
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Charlene ARRINGTON v. Jennifer COCKLIN, in her individual capacity, and as supervisor at Glaxowellcome Smithkline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a Glaxosmithkline, Defendants—Appellees, and Glaxowellcome, d/b/a Glaxosmithkline Staffing Alliance/Manpower, Incorporated Mari Beth Neely, in her individual capacity and as a supervisor at Glaxo Smithkline Beecham Corporation, formerly known as Glaxosmithkline, formerly known as Glaxowellcome Manpower of North Carolina
- Status
- Published