# Brayboy v. Robeson County Board of Education

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 24, 2010 · 401 F. App'x 802

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/179885

## Case

- **Full name:** Robert BRAYBOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 24, 2010
- **Citations:** 401 F. App'x 802
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Shedd, Agee, Hamilton
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/179885

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1201

ROBERT BRAYBOY,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION,

Defendant – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00204-H)

Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: November 24, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Brayboy, Appellant Pro Se. Curtis Hudson Allen, III,
Deborah R. Stagner, THARRINGTON & SMITH, LLP, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Robert Brayboy appeals from the district court’s

judgment in Defendant’s favor on his racial harassment and

discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A.

§§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010), and his

disability harassment claim, brought pursuant to the Americans

with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213

(West 2005 & Supp. 2010). In his informal brief, Brayboy fails

to address the district court’s dispositive reasons for

disposing of his claims and, thus, has forfeited appellate

review of those rulings. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (limiting review

to issues raised in the informal brief); see also Edwards v.

City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999)

(failure to raise issue in opening brief constitutes abandonment

of that issue). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

judgment. See Brayboy v. Robeson County Bd. of Educ., No. 7:07-

cv-00204-H (E.D.N.C. Jan. 20, 2010). 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: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/179885. Public record. Not legal advice.