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)
06-1433•James Guseh v. Univ. of N.C., 413 S.E.2d 276, 289-92 N.C. 1992 , but rather, was barred because…
06-1433Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 17, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1433
JAMES GUSEH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL UNIVERSITY, through the
Board of Governors of the University of North
Carolina; BERNICE D. JOHNSON, in her
individual and official capacity as Dean of
the College of Arts and Sciences of North
Carolina Central University,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (1:04-cv-00042-JAB)
Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 17, 2006
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Guseh, Appellant Pro Se. John Payne Scherer II, Assistant
Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
*The district court accepted the magistrate judge’s
recommendation with one exception: the court found that Guseh’s
claim under the North Carolina Constitution was not barred by
sovereign immunity, Corum v. Univ. of N.C., 413 S.E.2d 276, 289-92
(N.C. 1992), but rather, was barred because such direct
constitutional claims may only proceed in the absence of an
alternative state remedy. Id.; Ware v. Fort, 478 S.E.2d 218, 222
(N.C. App. 1996).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
James Guseh appeals the district court’s order accepting*
the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his
employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Guseh v. North Carolina Central
Univ., No. 1:04-cv-00042-JAB (M.D.N.C. Mar. 13, 2006). 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.