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)
08-1554•La Monica Samuel v. Williamsburg James City County School Board, by Denise W. Koch, Chairperson
08-1554Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 15, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1554
LA MONICA SAMUEL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WILLIAMSBURG JAMES CITY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, by Denise W. Koch,
Chairperson,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
WILLIAMSBURG JAMES CITY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL, Jeffrey Smith,
Assistant Superintendent; JAMESTOWN HIGH SCHOOL, Williamsburg
James City County, Andrew Cypress, Principal, Robert Nilson,
Director of Guidance, Diane Spearman, Counselor; LAFAYETTE
HIGH SCHOOL, Williamsburg James City County, Dan Fields,
Assistant Principal; COLONIAL UNISERVE BOARD, National
Education Association, Jami Chapman, Director,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Walter D. Kelley, District
Judge. (4:04-cv-00050-WDK-FBS)
Submitted: September 11, 2008 Decided: September 15, 2008
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
La Monica Samuel, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Lawrence Dumville,
NORRIS, ST. CLAIR & LOTKIN, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
La Monica Samuel appeals the district court’s order
granting the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denying
relief in her civil action. We have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. See Samuel v. Williamsburg James City
County Sch. Bd., No. 4:04-cv-00050-WDK-FBS (E.D. Va. Mar. 31,
2008). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.