Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Viswanathan v. Board of Governors, 96-1443 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-1443 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 03, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1443 T. M. VISWANATHAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA; C. D. SPANGLER, JR., in his official capacity; FAYETTEVILLE STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES; JESSEE WILLIAMS, DR., in his official and individual capacity; LLOYD V. HACKLEY, DR., in his official and individual capacity; LEO EDWARDS, DR., in his official and individual capacity; JON YOUNG, DR., in his official and
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1443 T. M. VISWANATHAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA; C. D. SPANGLER, JR., in his official capacity; FAYETTEVILLE STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES; JESSEE WILLIAMS, DR., in his official and individual capacity; LLOYD V. HACKLEY, DR., in his official and individual capacity; LEO EDWARDS, DR., in his official and individual capacity; JON YOUNG, DR., in his official and individual capacity; MORRIS BLOUNT, DR., in his official and individual capacity; JOSEPH MONROE, DR., in his official and individual capacity; CLARENCE WHITE, DR., in his official and individual capacity; KAYE WEBB, in her official and individual capacity; FELTON THOMAS, DR., in his individual and official capacity; ALL DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Hiram H. Ward, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-528-1) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 3, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. T. M. Viswanathan, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas J. Ziko, Celia Grasty Jones, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders granting Defendants' motion to dismiss and denying Appellant's motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Viswanathan v. Board of Governors, No. CA-94-528-1 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 1 & Apr. 24, 1996). In light of the disposition of the appeal, we deny Appellant's motion to vacate order. 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