The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
20-1522•WAYNE A. JONES, Ed.D. v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY; MAKOLA M. ABDULLAH, Ph.D.
20-1522Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 4, 2021
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1522
WAYNE A. JONES, Ed.D.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY; MAKOLA M. ABDULLAH, Ph.D.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:19-cv-00467-JAG)
Submitted: January 12, 2021 Decided: February 4, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard F. Hawkins, III, THE HAWKINS LAW FIRM, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellant. Mark R. Herring, Attorney General, Samuel T. Towell, Deputy Attorney
General, E. Lewis Kincer, Jr. Senior Assistant Attorney General, Ramona L. Taylor,
Associate College Counsel/Assistant Attorney General, William Ryan Waddell, Assistant
Attorney General, Toby J. Heytens, Solicitor General, Michelle S. Kallen, Deputy Solicitor
General, Martine E. Cicconi, Deputy Solicitor General, Jessica Merry Samuels, Assistant
Solicitor General, Zachary R. Glubiak, John Marshall Fellow, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Wayne A. Jones, Ed.D., a former assistant professor at Virginia State University
(“the University”), appeals the district court’s order granting the University’s and its
President’s motion to dismiss Jones’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Jones v. Va. State Univ., No. 3:19-cv-00467-JAG (E.D. Va. Apr. 6,
2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.