Case Name: Linda V. HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-07-01
Citations: 139 F. App'x 215
Docket Number: No. 04-15677; D.C. Docket No. 02-03030-CV-JTC-1
Parties: Linda V. HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before BLACK, HULL and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 139
Pages: 215–215

Head Matter:
Linda V. HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 04-15677.
Non-Argument Calendar
D.C. Docket No. 02-03030-CV-JTC-1.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
July 1, 2005.
Mary Jo Workman, Duluth, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
E. Scott Smith, Paige Peltier Freeman, Fisher & Phillips, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before BLACK, HULL and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Linda V. Hill appeals the district court's grant of defendant Norfolk Southern Railway Company's (Norfolk's) motion for summary judgment in her action under Title VII of the CM Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Norfolk's motion for summary judgment was unopposed because the district court struck Hill's belated response to the motion. Hill does not appeal the striking of her response. As such, Hill has abandoned any argument the district court should have accepted her late-filed response. See Allison v. McGhan Med. Corp., 184 F.3d 1300, 1317 n. 17 (11th Cir.1999) (holding "[tissues that are not clearly outlined in an appellant's initial brief are deemed abandoned"). Because Norfolk presented evidence it was entitled to summary judgment in that it had a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for its action, and Hill did not respond, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in Norfolk's favor.
AFFIRMED.