The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
20-2300•Susan Woodard v. Sdh Services East
20-2300Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 15, 2022
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-2300
SUSAN WOODARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SDH SERVICES EAST,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
WHITNEY BETTIE, General Manager; LOREE SORENSON, Senior Manager,
Employee Relations,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (0:19-cv-00335-CMC)
Submitted: February 28, 2022 Decided: March 15, 2022
Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Susan Woodard, Appellant Pro Se. William Lee Duda, Christopher Ray Thomas,
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Susan Woodard appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of
the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination complaint pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, 41(b), as a sanction for her failure to comply with discovery rules. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Woodard v. SDH Servs. E., No. 0:19-cv-00335-CMC
(D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2020). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.