Court Opinion

ID: 2963048
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:05:42.862346+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:09:41.651955
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          December 21, 1994                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 94-1595                                   GERTRUDE A. GOROD,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                   [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]
                                               ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                  Cyr, Circuit Judge,
                                       _____________                            Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                    ____________________                              and Stahl, Circuit Judge.
                                         _____________                                 ____________________            Gertrude Gorod on brief pro se.
            ______________            Joseph L. DeLorey on brief for appellees.
            _________________                                 ____________________                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   Pro se plaintiff  Gertrude Gorod has  sued
                 __________    ___ __            her former  union,  the National  Association  of  Government            Employees (NAGE)  and its president,  Kenneth Lyons, alleging            that  they  intentionally discriminated  against  her on  the            basis of her age, sex, and religion in violation of Title VII            of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in            Employment  Act, 29 U.S.C.  621  et seq.   We have thoroughly            reviewed the record and the parties' briefs on appeal and are            persuaded that  the  district court's  analysis  is  correct.            Accordingly, the judgment of  the district court is affirmed.
                                                                ________            See Local Rule 27.1.
            ___