Stewart v. Virginia Commonwealth University

Fourth Circuit

Stewart v. Virginia Commonwealth University

414 F. App'x 555

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 4, 2011

Docket10-1475

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 414 F. App'x 555 (Stewart v. Virginia Commonwealth University) 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

Stewart v. Virginia Commonwealth University, 414 F. App'x 555 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

*556 Affíi'med in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ralph Stewart, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2005 & Supp.2010) (“Title VII”), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213 (West 2005 & Supp.2010) (“ADA”). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error, with the exception of Stewart’s claim alleging Title VII violations against Virginia Commonwealth University (“VCU”), VCU Health System, Medical College of Virginia Foundation, and MCV Hospitals Authority. Accordingly, we affirm those portions of the judgment for the reasons stated by the district court. See Stewart v. VCU, No. 3:09-cv-00738-HEH, 2010 WL 1170002 (E.D.Va. Mar. 23, 2010).

The district court dismissed the complaint against VCU and its allied medical facilities on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds. However, the Supreme Court has held that, in enacting Title VII, Congress properly abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for such suits. See Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445, 456-57, 96 S.Ct. 2666, 49 L.Ed.2d 614 (1976) (holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 abrogates the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity). Therefore, the district court erred in dismissing Stewart’s Title VII claim against VCU and its allied medical facilities on this basis. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment as to these parties, affirm in all other respects, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion. We further deny Stewart’s motion to strike. 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 IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

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

*556 Affíi'med in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ralph Stewart, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2005 & Supp.2010) (“Title VII”), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 to 12213 (West 2005 & Supp.2010) (“ADA”). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error, with the exception of Stewart’s claim alleging Title VII violations against Virginia Commonwealth University (“VCU”), VCU Health System, Medical College of Virginia Foundation, and MCV Hospitals Authority. Accordingly, we affirm those portions of the judgment for the reasons stated by the district court. See Stewart v. VCU, No. 3:09-cv-00738-HEH, 2010 WL 1170002 (E.D.Va. Mar. 23, 2010).

The district court dismissed the complaint against VCU and its allied medical facilities on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds. However, the Supreme Court has held that, in enacting Title VII, Congress properly abrogated the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity for such suits. See Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer, 427 U.S. 445, 456-57, 96 S.Ct. 2666, 49 L.Ed.2d 614 (1976) (holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 abrogates the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity). Therefore, the district court erred in dismissing Stewart’s Title VII claim against VCU and its allied medical facilities on this basis. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment as to these parties, affirm in all other respects, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion. We further deny Stewart’s motion to strike. 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 IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

414 F. App'x 555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stewart-v-virginia-commonwealth-university-ca4-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack