Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Akindahunsi v. MS Valley State Univ, 98-60731 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 98-60731 Visitors: 29
Filed: Aug. 09, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-60731 Summary Calendar _ OLUWOLFE AKINDAHUNSI, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MISSISSIPPI VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY; WILLIAM SUTTON; JAMES BREYLEY; ERIC THOMAS; ROY HUDSON; WALTER SIMMS; ESTELLE SIMMS, Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi 4:97-CV-158-S-B _ August 6, 1999 Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Oluwolfe Akindahunsi, pro se,
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 98-60731 Summary Calendar _____________________ OLUWOLFE AKINDAHUNSI, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MISSISSIPPI VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY; WILLIAM SUTTON; JAMES BREYLEY; ERIC THOMAS; ROY HUDSON; WALTER SIMMS; ESTELLE SIMMS, Defendants-Appellees. _________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi 4:97-CV-158-S-B _________________________________________________________________ August 6, 1999 Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Oluwolfe Akindahunsi, pro se, appeals the summary judgment dismissing his employment discrimination claims arising out of the non-renewal of his teaching contract at Mississippi Valley State University; the order denying his motion for relief from the judgment; and the order denying his motion to enjoin the defendants-appellees from using certain information in his personnel file. Akindahunsi contends that the district court erred by denying relief from the judgment, asserting that his failure to respond * 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. timely to the summary judgment motion was in good faith; and that the documents attached to his response created a material fact issue regarding whether the refusal to renew his contract was based upon his national origin. In the light of our review of the record and the briefs, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment and orders appealed from. (Akindahunsi’s motions to file record excerpts in excess of the page limitation, for leave to file reply brief out of time, and for leave to file reply brief in its present form, are GRANTED; his motion for injunction pending appeal is DENIED.) 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