Huff v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety

697 F. App'x 181
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 8, 2017
Docket16-2378
StatusUnpublished

This text of 697 F. App'x 181 (Huff v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Huff v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety, 697 F. App'x 181 (4th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Freddie Wayne Huff, II, appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants *182 summary judgment on Huffs equal protection, due process, and North Carolina wrongful discharge claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order and judgment. See Huff v. N.C. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, No. 1:15-cv-00599-CCE-JEP (M.D.N.C. Nov. 2, 2016); see also Engquist v. Or. Dep’t of Agric., 553 U.S. 591, 605, 128 S.Ct. 2146, 170 L.Ed.2d 975 (2008) (holding that “the class-of-one theory of equal protection— which presupposes' that like individuals should be treated alike, and that to treat them differently is to classify them in a way that must survive at least rationality review—is simply a poor fit in the public context”); Muchira v. Al-Rawaf 850 F.3d 605, 616 (4th Cir. 2017), pet. for cert. filed, No. 17-154 (U.S. Jul. 28, 2017) (recognizing that “[cjonclusory allegations and speculation will not suffice” to defeat summary judgment); Huff v. N.C. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 782 S.E.2d 926 (N.C. Ct. App.) (holding that Huffs “State employment with the State Highway Patrol did not meet the statutory minimum for qualification as a career State employee”), rev. denied, Huff v. N.C. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 369 N.C. 67, 793 S.E.2d 222 (2016). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture
553 U.S. 591 (Supreme Court, 2008)
Winfred Muchira v. Halah Al-Rawaf
850 F.3d 605 (Fourth Circuit, 2017)
Huff v. N.C. Department of Public Safety
369 N.C. 67 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2016)
Huff v. NC Dep't of Pub. Safety
793 S.E.2d 222 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2016)
Huff v. NC Dep't of Pub. Safety
782 S.E.2d 926 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
697 F. App'x 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huff-v-north-carolina-department-of-public-safety-ca4-2017.