Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Nancy MASSENBURG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INNOVATIVE TALENT SOLUTIONS, INC.; Lee Air Conditioners, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, Ashley Hunt, d/b/a Innovative Talent Solutions; Unnamed Client Discriminatory Hiring Policy, enforced for, by Ashley; Kim Korando, ITS, Inc. legal representation, Defendants.
Nancy Massenburg appeals the district court's order granting Innovative Talent Solutions, Inc.’s (“ITS”) motion for summary judgment, granting Lee Air Conditioners, Inc.’s (“Lee Air”) motion to dismiss, granting in part ITS's motion to strike Massenburg's second amended complaint, dismissing as moot Massenburg's motion to compel, striking Massenburg's supplemental claims, dismissing as moot Defendants’ remaining motions, and denying Massenburg's remaining motions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Massenburg v. Innovative Talent Sols., Inc., No. 5:16-cv-00957-D, 2018 WL 2222724 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 4, 2019).* 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. The fact that Massenburg filed her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge against Lee Air after she added Lee Air as a Defendant in the civil action was not a sufficient ground on which to dismiss the discrimination claim brought against Lee Air pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012 & Supp. 2018). See Henderson v. E. Freight Ways, Inc., 460 F.2d 258, 260 (4th Cir. 1972) (providing that, when right-to-sue letter is issued prior to dismissal of case, it “validate[s] the pending action”). However, we conclude that any error was harmless because Massenburg's Title VII claim against Lee Air is time-barred. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-5(e)(1).
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-1192
Decided: October 08, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)