# Ralph Hayes v. Lynchburg City School Board

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 29, 2014

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2737884

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 29, 2014
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **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/2737884

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1328

RALPH L. HAYES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LYNCHBURG CITY SCHOOL BOARD, as constituted by Mary Ann H.
Barker, Dr. Regina T. Dolan-Sewell, Charlie White, Jenny
Poore, J. Marie Walker, Thomas H. Webb, Albert Billingsly,
Katie Snydor, and Treney Tweedy, Members of the School
Board,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior
District Judge. (6:13-cv-00008-NKM-RSB)

Submitted: September 25, 2014 Decided: September 29, 2014

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ralph L. Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Phillip Verne Anderson, John
Chadwick Johnson, FRITH, ANDERSON & PEAKE, PC, Roanoke,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

In this Title VII action alleging racial

discrimination, Ralph L. Hayes appeals the district court’s

order granting Lynchburg City School Board’s motion for summary

judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny Hayes’ motion for the appointment

of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Hayes v. Lynchburg City Sch. Bd., No. 6:13-cv-00008-NKM-

RSB (W.D. Va. Mar. 7, 2014). We deny as moot the School Board’s

motion to quash. 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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2737884. Public record. Not legal advice.