Filed: Jul. 30, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1083 EULA DANCE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION; JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS, Defendants - Appellees. No. 96-1287 EULA DANCE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION; JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1083 EULA DANCE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION; JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS, Defendants - Appellees. No. 96-1287 EULA DANCE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION; JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabet..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1083
EULA DANCE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION;
JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 96-1287
EULA DANCE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ELIZABETH CITY-PASQUOTANK BOARD OF EDUCATION;
JOSEPH W. PEEL, Doctor; CLEVELAND HAWKINS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Malcolm J. Howard,
District Judge. (CA-94-44-2-H2)
Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 30, 1996
2
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eula Dance, Appellant Pro Se. John David Leidy, HORNTHAL, RILEY,
ELLIS & MALAND, Elizabeth City, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 denying re-
lief on her 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) complaint and granting in part
the Appellees' motion for costs. We have reviewed the record and
the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accord-
ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Dance v.
Elizabeth City-Pasquotank Bd. of Educ., No. CA-94-44-2-H2 (E.D.N.C.
Nov. 6, 1995; Feb. 5, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3