Elizabeth Alexander v. Bloomingdale's Inc., No. 19-1657 (4th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1657 ELIZABETH ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BLOOMINGDALE’S INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:17-cv-03283-PWG) Submitted: October 15, 2019 Decided: October 17, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Elizabeth Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Michael C. Christman, MACY’S LAW DEPARTMENT, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Elizabeth Alexander appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing her civil action for race discrimination based on a hostile work environment, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012 & Supp. 2019), and retaliation, in violation of Maryland law. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Alexander’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Alexander has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court’s judgment. 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 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.