The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
00-2003•WHEELING JESUIT UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, a West Virginia corporation v. City of Wheeling, a municipal corporation
00-2003Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 18, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-2003
WHEELING JESUIT UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, a
West Virginia corporation; BERNARD W. SCHMITT,
Most Reverend, Bishop of the Roman Catholic
Dioceses of Wheeling-Charleston; THE BOARD OF
EDUCATION OF THE COUNTY OF OHIO, A PUBLIC
CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
CITY OF WHEELING, a municipal corporation;
JOHN W. LIPPHARDT, JR.; BARRY D. CROW; MARY
MARGARET KLEEH; MICHAEL A. NAU; LAWRENCE J.
SCHMITT, JR.; VERNON E. SEALS; CLIFF SLIGAR,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis-
trict of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (CA-00-14-5)
Submitted: December 29, 2000 Decided: January 18, 2001
Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
John P. Bailey, BAILEY, RILEY, BUCH & HARMAN, L.C., Wheeling, West
Virginia; James F. Companion, SCHRADER, BYRD & COMPANION, P.L.L.C.,
Wheeling, West Virginia; James C. Gardill, PHILLIPS, GARDILL,
KAISER & ALTMEYER, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellants. Ronald
M. Musser, Rosemary J. Humway-Warmuth, OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICI-
TOR, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Appellants appeal the district court’s order denying relief on
their 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. Wheeling Jesuit Univ. v. City of Wheeling, No. CA-
00-14-5 (N.D.W. Va. July 10, 2000). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.