Peabody v. Wackenhut Corp
Peabody v. Wackenhut Corp
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1056
ALBERT D. PEABODY, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus
THE WACKENHUT CORPORATION OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA; NATIONSBANK, N.A.; WILLIAM ISENBERG; HENRY HANDY; STEVEN M. SORENSEN; KIM LEFTWICH, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-624-3)
Submitted: March 31, 1998 Decided: August 27, 1998
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert D. Peabody, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Henry Cannon Spalding, III, SANDS, ANDERSON, MARKS & MILLER, Richmond, Virginia; Jonathan P. Harmon, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., Richmond, Vir- ginia; Keith Allen May, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3 (1994) and denying his motions for appointment of counsel and default judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Ap- pellant’s action under § 1983 was barred by the statute of limita- tions and was not cognizable against the private Defendants.
Appellant also failed to state a claim under Title VII. 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.
AFFIRMED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.