Cristina Gillaspie v. Carlos Del Toro, No. 22-1977 (4th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-1977 CRISTINA GILLASPIE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CARLOS DEL TORO, Secretary of the Navy, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00453-DCN) Submitted: May 18, 2023 Decided: May 22, 2023 Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Allan R. Holmes, Timothy O. Lewis, Rebecca J. Wolfe, GIBBS & HOLMES, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Adair F. Boroughs, United States Attorney, William H. Jordan, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cristina Gillaspie appeals the district court’s orders (1) accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant the Secretary of the Navy summary judgment on Gillaspie’s discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213, as applied through § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 to 796l; and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634; and (2) denying Gillaspie’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. See Gillaspie v. Del Toro, No. 2:19-cv00453-DCN (D.S.C. Mar. 29, 2022; Aug. 25, 2022). 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.