Summary Calendar ROLISHA GOINS v. Hitchcock Independent School District

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
March 27, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 02-41209
Summary Calendar
____________________
ROLISHA GOINS
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
HITCHCOCK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; JOSIE M ORR,
Individually and as President of the Board of Education for
Hitchcock Independent School District; RON MEIER,
Individually and as Vice President of the Board of Education
for Hitchcock Independent School District; DORIS
SCURRY-KENNEDY, As an individual and as Secretary for the
Board of Education for Hitchcock Independent School
District; PAT TURNER, As an individual and as a Member of
the Board of Education for Hitchcock Independent School
District; RICKY BOND, As an Individual and as a Member of
the Board of Education for Hitchcock Independent School
District; SHAWN KADLECEK, As an Individual and as a Member
of the Board of Education for Hitchcock Independent School
District; RUTH A KANE, As an Individual and as
Superintendent; BILL BANKS, Individually and as former
Superintendent of Hitchcock Independent School District
Defendants - Appellees
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
No. G-01-CV-498
_________________________________________________________________
Before KING, Chief Judge, and BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit
Judges.

-- 1 of 3 --

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
2
PER CURIAM:*
This case arises from a claim of sex discrimination
allegedly suffered by Plaintiff-Appellant Rolisha Goins while
serving as a women’s basketball and volleyball coach for
Defendant-Appellee Hitchcock Independent School District
(“H.I.S.D.”). Although separate from another sex discrimination
suit brought by Goins against H.I.S.D. in 1998, this case relates
to a settlement agreement resulting from the 1998 lawsuit and
involves allegations that H.I.S.D., along with the individual
defendants, did not faithfully execute Goins’s employment
contract in the spirit of the settlement agreement.
On appeal, Goins contends that the district court erred in
numerous ways: (1) in failing to enforce its instructions in an
oral hearing; (2) in failing to follow its own scheduling
instructions in another hearing; (3) in issuing a docket control
order; (4) in denying her request for special master, ignoring
her request to amend the complaint, and granting H.I.S.D.’s
Partial Motion to Dismiss; (5) in denying her Motion for
Reconsideration; (6) in striking her Motion to Amend; (7) in
denying her Motion to Recuse; (8) in granting H.I.S.D.’s Motion
for Summary Judgment and denying her Motions for Reconsideration

-- 2 of 3 --

3
and for Leave to Supplement the Motion to Amend the Complaint;
and (9) in granting judgment for H.I.S.D.
The district court extensively reviewed each of the issues
presented on appeal and adequately responded to each one in kind,
even in situations where Defendants’ motions were technically
unopposed due to Goins’s inability to respond to them. Based on
our review of the record, we conclude that Goins cannot establish
reversible error. Therefore, the judgment of the district court
is
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --