Dean Palmer v. E. F. Thompson, Inc., No. 10-1838 (4th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case

Court Description: <

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1838 DEAN ERIC PALMER, Plaintiff Appellant, v. E.F. THOMPSON, INC., Defendant Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Tommy E. Miller, Magistrate Judge. (2:10-cv-00051-TEM) Submitted: March 31, 2010 Decided: April 7, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part; vacated and remanded in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dean Eric Palmer, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Blaine MCGUIRE, WOODS, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Martin, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dean Eric Palmer appeals the district court s order dismissing this employment discrimination action for failure to state a claim. With respect to Palmer s claim of race discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, we conclude that Palmer set forth facts sufficient to state a prima facie claim of discriminatory discharge. See Miles v. Dell, Inc., 429 F.3d 480, 486-87 &amp; n.3 (4th Cir. 2004). We, of course, offer no opinion on whether plaintiff presents any issue of triable fact. We accordingly vacate that portion of the district court s order related to the Title VII claim and remand for further proceedings. With respect to the claim of a violation of the American s with Disabilities Act, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Palmer v. E.F. Thompson, Inc., No. 2:10-cv-00051-TEM (E.D. Va. June 23, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART 2

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.