Joe Ford v. Georgetown Co School District, No. 18-2260 (4th Cir. 2019)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2260 JOE FORD; FOY FORD, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. GEORGETOWN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT; SUPERINTENDANT RANDALL DOZIER, in his official and individual capacity; ZELMA F. CARR, in her official and individual capacity; PAT DELOEONE, in her official and individual capacity; JIM DUMM, in his official and individual capacity; SARAH F. ELLIOTT, in her official and individual capacity; SANDRA JOHNSON, in her official and individual capacity; RICHARD KERR, in his official and individual capacity; ARTHUR LANCE, in his official and individual capacity; ELERY LITTLE, in his official and individual capacity; JOHNNIE WILSON, in his official and individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:17-cv-01884-DCN) Submitted: April 18, 2019 Decided: April 29, 2019 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geraldine Sumter, FERGUSON CHAMBERS & SUMTER, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellants. John M. Reagle, HALLIGAN MAHONEY WILLIAMS SMITH FAWELY & REAGLE, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Joe Ford and Foy Ford appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ford v. Georgetown Cty. Sch. Dist., No. 2:17-cv-01884-DCN (D.S.C. Sept. 28, 2018). We 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.