Case ID: f-appx_100/html/0855-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Pamela EATON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROCHESTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT; Board of Education of the Rochester City School District; Members of the Board of Education; Dr. Clifford B. Janey, Individually and as Superintendent of Schools, Rochester City School District; Al Evangelista, Individually and as Secondary School Personnel Director in Charge of Technology, Rochester City School District; Laura Volk, Individually and as Director of Personnel, Rochester City School District; Mary Charipar, Individually and as Director of Technology Education, Rochester City School District; Maurice Bell, Individually and as Supervising Director of Education, 9-12, Rochester City School District; Rebecca Torres-Lynch, Individually and as Director of Human Resources, Rochester City School District; C. Michael Robinson, Individually and as Principal of John Marshall High School; Joseph Munno, Individually and as House Administrator at John Marshall High School; Mariella K. Meinhold, Individually and as School Psychologist, John Marshall High School; Mollie Traub, Individually and as Mediation Specialist and Teacher, John Marshall High School; Barbara Taylor, Individually and as Secretary, John Marshall High School; David Altobelli, Individually and as RTA Building Representative, John Marshall High School; Mary Barnum, Individually and as RTA Consultant; the Rochester Teachers Association; Adam Urbanski, Individually and as President of the Rochester Teachers Association; Martha Keating, Individually and as Second Vice President of the Rochester Teachers Association; and Tamara Gilbert, Defendants-Appellees.
    Docket No. 02-7535.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    June 9, 2004.
    UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    Emmelyn Logan-Baldwin, Rochester, NY, for Appellant.
    Carol E. Heckman, Harter, Secrest & Emery, LLP, Rochester, NY, for Rochester City School District Appellees.
    Ivor Moskowitz, Latham, NY, for Rochester Teachers Association Appellees.
    PRESENT: WINTER, JACOBS, Circuit Judges, and POLLACK, District Judge.
   SUMMARY ORDER

This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Larimer, J.), entered on March 28, 2002, granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissing the action in its entirety. See Eaton v. Rochester City Sch. Dist., et al., 196 F.Supp.2d 314 (W.D.N.Y.2002). Pamela Eaton, a teacher in the Rochester City School District, has brought a variety of discrimination-type claims against the Rochester City School District, the Rochester Teachers Association, and numerous officers and employees of those entities. Familiarity is assumed as to the facts, the procedural context, and the specification of appellate issues.

The district court dismissed plaintiffs claims on the merits. We affirm for substantially the same reasons stated in the district court’s opinion.

Plaintiff argues for the first time on appeal that she was denied the right to non-conflicting representation and that this Court should direct non-conflicting representation of the defendants. This argument is incomprehensible and was in any event waived because it was not raised below. See Mycak v. Honeywell, Inc., 953 F.2d 798, 803 (2d Cir.1992).

This appeal is frivolous and it appears that this action has been frivolous from beginning to end. Accordingly, our mandate does not preclude imposition of Rule 11 sanctions, including attorneys’ fees, in the district court upon motion by any defendant or by the court sua sponte.

For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.