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.
Ealise CRUMB, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION; Raoul Alvarez, trading as McDonald's (Store 1840), as an individual and owner of Ram Foods, Inc., a corporation and the franchise McDonald's; Ram Foods, Inc., trading as McDonald's (Store 1840), a corporation; Prince George's County Human Relations Commission, a state agency; D. Michael Lyles, in his individual and official capacity as Executive Director of Prince George's County Human Relations Commission, a Civil Rights Agency for the county; Prince George's County, a body corporate and politic, Defendants - Appellees.
Ealise Crumb appeals a variety of orders pertaining to her civil lawsuit. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Crumb's motion to exceed page limitations and affirm. Crumb v. McDonald's Corp., No. 8:15-cv-01719 (D. Md., Feb. 26, 2016; Nov. 18, 2016; Apr. 27, 2017; June 20, 2017; Dec. 6, 2017; Oct. 21, 2019; Nov. 12, 2019; Nov. 21, 2019; Nov. 22, 2019; Dec. 16, 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. To the extent Crumb seeks to appeal additional orders she lists only in her informal brief, she did not identify those orders in her notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B). And, in any event, the district court's rulings on those preliminary matters do not call into question the validity of its disposition of Crumb's action.
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Thank you for your feedback!
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. 20-1046
Decided: July 30, 2021
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)