UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

THEODORE C. KARIOTIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

PARRIS N. GLENDENING, as Governor

of the State of Maryland, in his

official capacity; DONALD N.

LANGENBERG, as Chancellor of the

University System of Maryland, in

his official capacity; ROBERT E.

MYERS, as interim President of the

University of Maryland University

College, in his official capacity; T.

No. 00-1398

BENJAMIN MASSEY, former President

of the University of Maryland

University College, in his personal

capacity; PAUL HAMLIN, former

Dean of the University of Maryland

University College, in his personal

capacity,

Defendants-Appellees.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF

THE NATIONAL CAPITAL AREA;

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF

MARYLAND, INC.,

Amici Curiae.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

William M. Nickerson, District Judge.

(CA-1982-WMN)

Submitted: August 18, 2000

Decided: September 6, 2000
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Theodore C. Kariotis, Appellant Pro Se. Sally Lotz Swann, Assistant

General Counsel, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Dwight Hall

Sullivan, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Arthur B. Spitzer, AMERICAN CIVIL

LIBERTIES UNION, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Theodore C. Kariotis appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint in

which he alleged that his position as Director of Economics at the

University of Maryland University College was eliminated due to his

vocal and public opposition to the college's announced plan to eliminate all full-time faculty and to employ only adjunct faculty members.

The district court determined that Kariotis' speech was in his personal

interest as an employee, rather than as a citizen on a matter of public

concern, and therefore concluded that the speech was not protected

under the First Amendment. See Pickering v. Board of Educ., 391

U.S. 563, 568 (1968) (announcing balancing test). Accepting the factual allegations in the complaint as true and affording Kariotis the

benefit of all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those allegations, see Mylan Labs., Inc. v. Matkari, 7 F.3d 1130, 1134 (4th Cir.

 2
1993), we find no support in the record for the conclusion that Kariotis' position--or that of any other academic director--would have

been affected by the plan to eliminate all full-time faculty in favor of

adjunct professors. Therefore, we conclude that the district court erred

in determining, at this stage of the record's development, that Kariotis' speech involved a matter of personal, rather than public, concern.

Accordingly we vacate the district court's order dismissing the complaint and remand for further proceedings.* We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid

the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED

_________________________________________________________________

*In remanding this case, we express no opinion as to whether or not

the speech at issue was protected speech. We conclude only that, on this

record, such a determination was premature.

 3