# Grant v. City of N. Charleston Housing

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 16, 2010

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1031547

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 16, 2010
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1031547

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-2194

DORIS S. GRANT,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

CITY OF NORTH CHARLESTON HOUSING AUTHORITY; BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF NORTH
CHARLESTON,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District
Judge. (2:06-cv-03242-CWH)

Submitted: February 3, 2010 Decided: February 16, 2010

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward M. Brown, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Caroline Wrenn Cleveland, CLEVELAND LAW, LLC, Charleston, South
Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Doris S. Grant appeals the district court’s order

adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granting the

Appellees’ summary judgment motion in Grant’s employment

discrimination case brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17

(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Grant v. City of North Charleston Hous. Auth.,

No. 2:06-cv-03242-CWH (D.S.C. Sept. 22, 2008). 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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1031547. Public record. Not legal advice.