Castro v. New York City Board

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

          August 4, 1992        [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

___________________

No. 92-1357

ELIGIO CASTRO,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                      NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.
                                  _________________

          No. 92-1482

                                    ELIGIO CASTRO,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                                 NEW YORK CITY BOARD
                                OF EDUCATION, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

__________________

                    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                    [Hon. Jaime Pieras, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before

                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,
                                         ___________
                           Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                     ____________________
                               and Cyr, Circuit Judge.
                                        _____________

___________________

               Eligio Castro on brief pro se.
               _____________
               Robert Abrams, Attorney  General of the  State of New  York,
               _____________
          and  Jeffrey I. Slonim, Assistant Attorney  General, on brief for
               _________________
          appellees New York City Board of Education, et al.
               O. Peter Sherwood,  Corporation Counsel of  the City of  New
               _________________
          York,  Stephen J. McGrath, Peter J. Cahill and Kristin M. Helmers
                 __________________  _______________     __________________
          on brief for appellee New York City Board of Education.
               Daniel  Lopez-Romo,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Rebecca
               __________________                                   _______
          Vargas-Vera,  Assistant  United  States Attorney,  on  brief  for
          ___________
          appellee Secretary of the United States Department of Education.

__________________

                                  __________________

Per Curiam.  We agree with the district court's February
                 __________

            11,  1992  opinion  and  affirm  the  judgment  of  dismissal

            substantially for the reasons stated by the district court.

                 Since  the action  was properly dismissed,  the district

            court   did   not   err   in   denying   injunctive   relief.

            Consequently,  the March  19, 1992  order denying  injunctive

            relief is summarily affirmed.

                 Appellant's motion to perfect diversity jurisdiction and

            other requests are denied.

                 Because these  appeals are frivolous,  double costs  are

            awarded to appellees.

                 Affirmed.
                 ________

-3-