Gierbolini v. Science Applications International Corp. , 548 F. App'x 925 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-2284
    CATHERINE GIERBOLINI,
    Plaintiff – Appellant,
    v.
    SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.     Leonie M. Brinkema,
    District Judge. (1:12-cv-01459-LMB-IDD)
    Submitted:   December 19, 2013            Decided:   December 23, 2013
    Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Catherine Gierbolini, Appellant Pro Se. Edward Lee Isler, Lori
    Hunt Turner, ISLER, DARE, RAY, RADCLIFFE & CONNOLLY, PC, Vienna,
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Catherine       Gierbolini              appeals    the     district      court’s
    order    granting       summary          judgment       for     Science        Applications
    International       Corporation            (“Science          Applications”)          as    to
    Gierbolini’s defamation claim.                   We have reviewed the record and
    find no reversible error. *               Contrary to Gierbolini’s assertions
    on appeal, Science Applications’ alleged refusal to respond to
    requests for employment verification cannot form the basis of an
    actionable defamation claim.                   See, e.g., Tharpe v. Saunders, 
    737 S.E.2d 890
    ,    892    (Va.      2013)        (“The   elements      of   defamation       are
    (1) publication        of   (2)     an    actionable          statement      with    (3)   the
    requisite       intent.”       (internal             quotation         marks     omitted));
    Hyland v. Raytheon Tech. Servs. Co., 
    670 S.E.2d 746
    , 750 (Va.
    2009) (“Generally, under our common law, a private individual
    asserting a claim of defamation first must show that a defendant
    has published a false factual statement that concerns and harms
    the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s reputation.”).                           Accordingly, we
    affirm   substantially         for       the    reasons       stated    by     the   district
    court.      Gierbolini         v.    Sci.        Applications        Int’l      Corp.,     No.
    1:12-cv-01459-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 8, 2013 & entered
    *
    Many of the arguments addressed in Gierbolini’s informal
    brief were not fairly raised in the district court. We decline
    to address these issues in the first instance.         See United
    States v. Edwards, 
    666 F.3d 877
    , 887 (4th Cir. 2011) (declining
    to address arguments raised for first time on appeal).
    2
    Oct. 9, 2013).     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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-4222

Citation Numbers: 548 F. App'x 925

Judges: Shedd, Davis, Floyd

Filed Date: 12/23/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024