Court Opinion

ID: 9959947
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-12 21:00:36.637064+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:01.146690
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1474      Doc: 34         Filed: 04/11/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1474

        ANTHONY DIAL,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        ROBESON COUNTY; ROBESON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
        SERVICES,

                            Defendant - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:20-cv-01135-WO-JLW)

        Submitted: February 27, 2024                                      Decided: April 11, 2024

        Before THACKER and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Nancy P. Quinn, THE QUINN LAW FIRM, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
        Appellant. Katherine Barber-Jones, HARTZOG LAW GROUP LLP, Raleigh, North
        Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1474      Doc: 34         Filed: 04/11/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Anthony Dial, a Native American male employed by Robeson County (“the

        County”) in its Department of Social Services, appeals the district court’s judgment entered

        after the court (1) granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss Dial’s

        employment-related and civil rights claims; and (2) granted the County summary judgment

        on Dial’s race discrimination claim, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act

        of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. We have reviewed the record and find no

        reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Dial v. Robeson

        Cnty., No. 1:20-cv-01135-WO-JLW (M.D.N.C. Mar. 27, 2023). We dispense with oral

        argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

        before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                       AFFIRMED

                                                     2