Skip to main content

Ritter v. Union Camp Corporati

4th CircuitJune 18, 2001No. 01-1101
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Michael, Motz, Gregory
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unpublished
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Discrimination

Outcome

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to Union Camp Corporation on Ritter's employment discrimination claims, finding that Ritter failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment and that affidavits he submitted were not newly discovered evidence.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** Ritter, an employee at Union Camp Corporation, sued his employer claiming he faced discrimination at work. He believed he was treated unfairly because of his protected characteristics and wanted the court to hold the company responsible for this alleged discriminatory treatment. **What the Court Decided:** The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Ritter and in favor of Union Camp Corporation. The court found that Ritter failed to prove the basic elements needed to show discrimination actually occurred. Additionally, when Ritter tried to submit sworn statements (affidavits) as new evidence to support his case, the court determined this evidence wasn't actually "newly discovered" and couldn't be used to restart his case. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This case shows how challenging it can be to win discrimination lawsuits. Workers must present strong, concrete evidence to prove discrimination happened - it's not enough to simply feel you were treated unfairly. The ruling also demonstrates that courts have strict rules about what evidence can be presented and when. Workers considering discrimination claims should gather documentation early and work with experienced attorneys to ensure they can meet the legal requirements to prove their case.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.