Joseph L. De Levay v. Richmond County School Board, as Body Corporate, Robert T. Ryland, Division Superintendent, and Leslie Hodges, Principal

284 F.2d 340
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 17, 1960
Docket8168_1
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 284 F.2d 340 (Joseph L. De Levay v. Richmond County School Board, as Body Corporate, Robert T. Ryland, Division Superintendent, and Leslie Hodges, Principal) 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
Joseph L. De Levay v. Richmond County School Board, as Body Corporate, Robert T. Ryland, Division Superintendent, and Leslie Hodges, Principal, 284 F.2d 340 (4th Cir. 1960).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This suit was instituted by Joseph L. DeLevay, a resident of the District of Columbia, against Richmond County School Board, an agency of the State of Virginia, and against two agents of the Board charged with the administration of the schools in Warsaw, Virginia. The complaint charged that the plaintiff had been employed by the Board as a teacher in the Warsaw High School for the period of ten months beginning September 1, 1955, and was discharged in breach of contract without just cause on December 8, 1955. Damages were claimed in the sum of $60,000; and jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship. The answer of the defendants admitted the contract and alleged that the plaintiff was dismissed in the course of ordinary administration of business.

Both parties filed motions for summary judgment and the District Judge granted the defendants’ motion and dismissed the ease. He based his action on the ground that the School Board as an agency of the State was not subject to suit by a citizen of the District of Columbia by reason of the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which provides that the judicial power,of the United States shall not extend to any suit prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state. He also held with regard to plaintiff’s allegations of defamation that, under the established law, the individual defendants were not liable for acts performed by them in the discharge of their official duties. These rulings were in accordance with the authorities and must therefore be sustained. See O’Neill v. Early, 4 Cir., 208 F.2d 286; Barr v. Matteo, 360 U.S. 564, 79 S.Ct. 1335, 3 L.Ed.2d 1434; Barton v. Rogers, 21 Idaho 609, 123 P. 478, 40 L.R.A.,N.S., 681; 53 C.J.S. Libel and Slander § 103, p. 166.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Eason v. Clark County School District
303 F.3d 1137 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
McKay v. Clarke County School Board
10 Va. Cir. 442 (Clarke County Circuit Court, 1988)
Westberry v. Fisher
309 F. Supp. 12 (D. Maine, 1980)
Frye v. Lukehard
364 F. Supp. 1379 (W.D. Virginia, 1973)
Bennett v. Gravelle
323 F. Supp. 203 (D. Maryland, 1971)
Heine v. Raus
261 F. Supp. 570 (D. Maryland, 1966)
Russell v. Edgewood Independent School District
406 S.W.2d 249 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1966)
Wihtol v. Crow
309 F.2d 777 (First Circuit, 1963)
Wihtol v. Crow
309 F.2d 777 (Eighth Circuit, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
284 F.2d 340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-l-de-levay-v-richmond-county-school-board-as-body-corporate-ca4-1960.