Hess v. Lander University

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Hess v. Lander University

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1341

CEFERINA GAYO HESS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LANDER UNIVERSITY; DANIEL W. BALL, President; ROBIN R. AGNEW, The Board of Trustees; ANN B. BOWEN, The Board of Trustees; BOBBY M. BOWERS, The Board of Trustees; C. TYRONE GILMORE, The Board of Trustees; FINIS E. HORNE, The Board of Trustees; MAURICE HOLLOWAY, The Board of Trustees; RAYMOND D. HUNT, The Board of Trustees; J. THOMAS KINARD, The Board of Trustees; GLENN J. LAWHON, JR., The Board of Trustees; MAMMIE W. NICHOLSON, The Board of Trustees; ANTHONY NOURY, The Board of Trustees; SALLY E. SELF, The Board of Trustees; GEORGE R. STARNES, The Board of Trustees; FRED THRAILKILL, The Board of Trustees; S. ANNE WALKER, The Board of Trustees; RICCI LAND, The Board of Trustees; M. CRAIG WHITE, The Board of Trustees; SUSAN C. GOING; LARRY A. JACKSON; WILLIAM T. MARTIN; TIMOTHY L. SNYDER; ARON G. TANNENBAUM; FRIEDERIKE WIEDEMANN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (8:04-cv-01474-GRA)

Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 19, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam.

Ceferina Gayo Hess, Appellant Pro Se. Vance J. Bettis, GIGNILLIAT, SAVITZ & BETTIS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Ceferina Gayo Hess appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on Hess’ civil action concerning her discharge from Lander

University. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Hess v. Lander Univ., No. 8:04-cv-01474-GRA

(D.S.C. Feb. 17, 2006). 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

- 3 -

Reference

Status
Unpublished