Robert Brayboy v. Robeson County Board of Educat

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:07-cv-00204-H Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998472184] [10-1201]

Robert Brayboy v. Robeson County Board of Educat

Doc. 0

Case: 10-1201 Document: 11

Date Filed: 11/24/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1201 ROBERT BRAYBOY, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. ROBESON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant ­ Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00204-H) Submitted: November 18, 2010 AGEE, Circuit Decided: Judges, and November 24, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior

Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Brayboy, Appellant Pro Se. Curtis Hudson Allen, III, Deborah R. Stagner, THARRINGTON & SMITH, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-1201 Document: 11

Date Filed: 11/24/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Robert judgment in Brayboy appeals favor on from his the district court's and

Defendant's

racial

harassment

discrimination and retaliation claims, brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp. 2010), and his

disability harassment claim, brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010). to address of the his district claims In his informal brief, Brayboy fails court's and, thus, dispositive has reasons for

disposing

forfeited

appellate

review of those rulings.

See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (limiting review

to issues raised in the informal brief); see also Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999)

(failure to raise issue in opening brief constitutes abandonment of that issue). judgment. cv-00204-H Accordingly, we affirm the district court's

See Brayboy v. Robeson County Bd. of Educ., No. 7:07(E.D.N.C. Jan. 20, 2010). 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

2