Amy Gosnell v. Catawba County

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-cv-00179-RLV-DCK. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999802976]. [15-1949]

Appeal: 15-1949

Doc: 24

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1949

AMY GOSNELL; ANN BOWMAN,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CATAWBA COUNTY; CATAWBA COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; COY REID;
DAVID LAIL; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:14-cv-00179-RLV-DCK)

Submitted:

April 21, 2016

Decided: April 25, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nancy Pulliam Quinn, THE
Carolina, for Appellants.
Wooten, CRANFILL SUMNER
Carolina, for Appellees.

QUINN LAW FIRM, Greensboro, North
Patrick H. Flanagan, Virginia M.
& HARTZOG LLP, Charlotte, North

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1949

Doc: 24

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Amy

Gosnell

judgment

and

granting

discrimination

Ann

Bowman

Defendants’

claims,

appeal

motion

brought

to

pursuant

the

district

dismiss
to

Title

court’s

their
VII

gender
of

the

Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to
2000e-17 (2012); age discrimination claims, brought pursuant to
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29
U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634 (2012); and state law claims for tortious
interference

with

contract,

defamation,

and

punitive

damages.

We have considered the parties’ arguments and find no reversible
error.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

Gosnell

v.

Catawba

July 24, 2015).
facts

and

materials

legal
before

Cnty.,

No.

5:14-cv-00179-RLV-DCK

(W.D.N.C.

We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
AFFIRMED

2