Case ID: f-appx_669/html/0174-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Sandra HARMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, a/k/a Cumberland County School District North Carolina; Marie Pierce-Ford, individually and in her capacity as Principal of Luther Nick Jeralds’, a Cumberland Co. Board of Ed. School; Larissa Perkins, in her capacity as Asst. Principal of Luther Nick Jeralds’, a Cumberland Co. Board of Ed. School (Nominal); Stafford Daniels, in her capacity as Asst. Principal of Luther Nick Jeralds’, a Cumberland Co. Board of Ed. School (Nominal); Dr. James McLauchlin, Chair of Cumberland County Board of Education, School Board Members; Dr. Frank Till, Superintendant Cumberland County Board of Education Schools; Joseph Locklear, Deceased, in his former capacity as Associate Superintendent of Cumberland County Schools (Nominal), Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 16-1543
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 29, 2016
    Decided: October 14, 2016
    Sandra Harmon, Appellant Pro Se. James Scott Lewis, Conor Patrick Regan, Hedrick, Gardner, Kincheloe & Garofalo, LLP, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Ap-pellees.
    Before WYNN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Sandra Harmon appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss her complaint brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (2012), and also alleging equal protection and due process violations. 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. Harmon v. Cumberland Cty. Bd. of Educ., No. 5:15-cv-00485-BR, 2016 WL 2699115 (E.D.N.C. May 5, 2016). We deny as moot Harmon’s motion to expedite ruling. 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