# Brown v. Dept of Health & Men

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 29, 1996

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/988809

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 29, 1996
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/988809

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-2212

RHONDA R. BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.
(CA-90-1564-JFM)

Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: March 29, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rhonda R. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Nathan Braverman, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying re-

lief on her complaint filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act

of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1981 &

Supp. 1995), and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983 (1988), alleging retal-

iatory discharge. We have reviewed the record and the district
court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene, No. CA-90-1564-JFM (D. Md. May 12,

1995). 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/988809. Public record. Not legal advice.