# San Antonio Crosby v. School Board

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · January 12, 2018 · 708 F. App'x 150

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4236484

## Case

- **Full name:** San Antonio CROSBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SCHOOL BOARD OF the CITY OF HAMPTON; Dr. Linda Schifflette; Bobbin Ruth, Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 12, 2018
- **Citations:** 708 F. App'x 150
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Gregory, Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Traxler
- **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/4236484

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1459

SAN ANTONIO CROSBY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF HAMPTON; DR. LINDA
SCHIFFLETTE; ROBBIN RUTH,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (4:14-cv-00167-AWA-LRL)

Submitted: August 24, 2017 Decided: January 12, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

San Antonio Crosby, Appellant Pro Se. Heather Kathleen Bardot, BANCROFT,
MCGAVIN, HORVATH & JUDKINS PC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

San Antonio Crosby appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment

to Defendants in this action alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012

& Supp. 2016), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Crosby v. Sch. Bd. of City of Hampton, No. 4:14-cv-00167-AWA-LRL (E.D. Va.

Mar. 13, 2017). 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/4236484. Public record. Not legal advice.