# Vallie Dean v. Board of Education of PG County

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 7, 2014 · 554 F. App'x 170

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2652647

## Case

- **Full name:** Vallie B. DEAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, Defendant-Appellee, and Prince George’s County Educator’s Association, Defendant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 7, 2014
- **Citations:** 554 F. App'x 170
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Davis, Diaz, Per Curiam, Shedd
- **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/2652647

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1976

VALLIE B. DEAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY EDUCATOR’S ASSOCIATION,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
Judge. (8:11-cv-01197-PJM)

Submitted: January 23, 2014 Decided: February 7, 2014

Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vallie B. Dean, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Judah Baror, Linda
Hitt Thatcher, THATCHER LAW FIRM, Greenbelt, Maryland, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Vallie Dean appeals the district court’s judgment

granting summary judgment to the Defendant in Dean’s employment

discrimination case. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. ∗ Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in

forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court at the hearing held on July 2, 2013. Dean v. Bd. of Educ.

of Prince George’s Cnty., No. 8:11-cv-01197-PJM (D. Md. July 3,

2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

∗
In addition to her substantive claims on appeal, Dean also
asserts that the district court’s order should be vacated
because her counsel was ineffective. However, a litigant in a
civil action has no constitutional or statutory right to
effective assistance of counsel. Sanchez v. U.S. Postal Serv.,
785 F.2d 1236, 1237 (5th Cir. 1986); see Pitts v. Shinseki, 700
F.3d 1279, 1284-86 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (collecting cases
recognizing rule), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 2856 (2013).

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2652647. Public record. Not legal advice.