Haley v. Chesapeake's Public

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2491 WILLIAM P. HALEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHESAPEAKE’S PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM; RANDOLPH NICHOLS, Doctor, Superintendent of the Chesa- peake Public Schools; JAMES S. GILMORE, III, Governor of Virginia; MARK L. EARLEY, Attorney General of Virginia; WILBERT BRYANT, Virgin- ia’s Secretary of Education; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; JO LYNNE DEMARY, State Superin- tendent of Public Instruction; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; BILL CLINTON, President of the United States of America; RICHARD W. RILEY, America’s Secretary of Education; JANET RENO, Attorney General of America; CITY OF CHESA- PEAKE, VIRGINIA; WILLIAM WARD, Chesapeake’s Mayor; RONALD HALLMAN, Chesapeake City Attor- ney; JOHN L. PAZOUR, City Manager of Chesa- peake, Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-520-2) Submitted: March 22, 2001 Decided: March 27, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William P. Haley, Appellant Pro Se. Mark L. Earley, Attorney Gen- eral, Ronald Curtis Forehand, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Ashley Lionel Taylor, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Alton Andrew Martin, Alison Paige Landry, Rita R. Woltz, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Kent Pendleton Porter, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia; Darlene Paige Bradberry, BREEDEN, SALB, BEASLEY & DUVALL, Norfolk, Vir- ginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: William P. Haley appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the court’s order denying relief in his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we af- firm on the reasoning of the district court. Haley v. Chesapeake’s Public School Sys., No. CA-00-520-2 (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 9, 2000; entered Nov. 13, 2000). We deny as moot Haley’s motion to expedite the appeal. 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 3