U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2001

Wheeling Jesuit Univ v. City of Wheeling

Wheeling Jesuit Univ v. City of Wheeling
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 18, 2001

Wheeling Jesuit Univ v. City of Wheeling

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-2003

WHEELING JESUIT UNIVERSITY, INCORPORATED, a West Virginia corporation; BERNARD W. SCHMITT, Most Reverend, Bishop of the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Wheeling-Charleston; THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE COUNTY OF OHIO, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus

CITY OF WHEELING, a municipal corporation; JOHN W. LIPPHARDT, JR.; BARRY D. CROW; MARY MARGARET KLEEH; MICHAEL A. NAU; LAWRENCE J.

SCHMITT, JR.; VERNON E. SEALS; CLIFF SLIGAR, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-00-14-5)

Submitted: December 29, 2000 Decided: January 18, 2001

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John P. Bailey, BAILEY, RILEY, BUCH & HARMAN, L.C., Wheeling, West Virginia; James F. Companion, SCHRADER, BYRD & COMPANION, P.L.L.C., Wheeling, West Virginia; James C. Gardill, PHILLIPS, GARDILL, KAISER & ALTMEYER, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellants. Ronald M. Musser, Rosemary J. Humway-Warmuth, OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICI- TOR, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wheeling Jesuit Univ. v. City of Wheeling, No. CA- 00-14-5 (N.D.W. Va. July 10, 2000). 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.