Larry Williams v. Board of Education of Wicomico, No. 12-2270 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2270 LARRY FRANCIS WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF WICOMICO COUNTY; JOHN FREDERICKSEN, Ph.D., (Individually and in his Official Capacity) Superintendent of Schools; STEPHANIE MOSES, (Individually & in her Official Capacity) Director of Human Resources; THOMAS FIELD, (Individually & in his Official Capacity) Former Interim Superintendent; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Individually & in their Official Capacities; WILLIAM CAIN, Individually & in his Official Capacity, Assistant Superintendent, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:10-cv-03582-WMN) Submitted: January 23, 2013 Decided: February 27, 2013 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Francis Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew G. Scott, Leslie Robert Stellman, PESSIN KATZ LAW, P.A., Towson, Maryland; Cullen B. Casey, Gregory Lee VanGeison, ANDERSON, COE & KING, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Larry order awarding Francis the Williams Defendants appeals summary the district judgment on court s his equal protection claim, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006), race discrimination claim, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (2006), and defamation claim. reversible error. We have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Williams v. Bd. of Educ. of Wicomico Cnty., No. 1:10-cv-03582-WMN (D. Md. Oct. 1, 2012). motion for appointment of counsel. We We deny Williams 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 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.