Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Barr v. Lexington County School District Three, 09-1419 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-1419 Visitors: 48
Filed: Oct. 20, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1419 JOSEPH LEE BARR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEXINGTON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT THREE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cv-01351-JFA-PJG) Submitted: September 29, 2009 Decided: October 20, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph L
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1419 JOSEPH LEE BARR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LEXINGTON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT THREE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cv-01351-JFA-PJG) Submitted: September 29, 2009 Decided: October 20, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Lee Barr, Appellant Pro Se. David Thomas Duff, Bryn Colette Sarvis, Breon C.M. Walker, DUFF, WHITE & TURNER, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Joseph Lee Barr appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee on Barr’s claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, breach of contract, and negligence. With respect to Barr’s latter three claims, Barr has failed to challenge on appeal the court’s basis for granting summary judgment for the Appellee. We therefore find that Barr has forfeited appellate review of those claims. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). With respect to Barr’s claim of racial discrimination, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barr v. Lexington County Sch. Dist., No. 3:07-cv-01351-JFA-PJG (D.S.C. Mar. 11, 2009). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer