Kimara Dewberry v. Gilmer County School Dist., No. 07-14958 (11th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 07-14958 FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT SEPT 19, 2008 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D. C. Docket No. 05-00102 CV-WCO-2 KIMARA DEWBERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GILMER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, RAIFORD CANTRELL, Superintendent of Gilmer County School District, in his official capacity, ALEXANDER B. RAINEY, former Superintendent of Gilmer County School District, in his individual capacity, SANDRA DAVENPORT, Principal of Ellijay Primary School, in her official and individual capacity, CHARME HARMON, Principal of Ellijay Elementary School, in her official and individual capacity, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (September 19, 2008) Before DUBINA, HULL and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Appellant Kimara Dewberry ( Dewberry ) appeals the district court s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees Gilmer County School District ( GCSD ), Raiford Cantrell, Alexander B. Rainey, Sandra Davenport, Charme Harmon, and Julie Martin1 on her race discrimination claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. We review de novo a district court s grant of summary judgment, viewing all the evidence, and drawing all reasonable inferences, in favor of the nonmoving party. Allstate Life Ins. Co. v. Miller, 424 F.3d 1113, 1115 (11th Cir. 2005). After reviewing the record, reading the parties briefs, and having the benefit of oral argument, we affirm the district court s grant of summary judgment 1 Martin was the GCSD personnel director from April 1999 through January 2004; Harmon and Davenport are principals at GCSD elementary schools; Rainey was the GCSD superintendent from December 1998 through December 2004; Cantrell is the current GCSD superintendent. 2 in favor of the Appellees because Dewberry fails to show that the reasons given by the Appellees for hiring Payton, Parks, Young, or Watkins were a mere pretext for discrimination. AFFIRMED. 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.