Barbara Curry v. Thomas Built Bus Inc., No. 17-1296 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1296 BARBARA LINDSEY CURRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THOMAS BUILT BUS INC., Defendant - Appellee, and ADAM STEIFER; MATTHEW FLATLOW; VANESSA, PARALEGAL; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION; DR. MICHAUX KILAPATRICK; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY ADJUDICATION UNIT, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00992-CCE-LPA) Submitted: July 27, 2017 Decided: July 31, 2017 Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barbara Lindsey Curry, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Allen Bright, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Greenville, South Carolina; Brodie Davis Erwin, Kevin Scott Joyner, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Barbara Lindsey Curry appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * Curry v. Thomas Built Bus Inc., No. 1:15-cv-00992-CCE-LPA (M.D.N.C. Mar. 3, 2017). 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 * To the extent that Curry seeks to raise new claims on appeal related to her resignation settlement or workers compensation, she fails to demonstrate that exceptional circumstances warrant consideration of those claims. See Pornomo v. United States, 814 F.3d 681, 686 (4th Cir. 2016) (“Absent exceptional circumstances we do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal.” (ellipsis omitted)). 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.