Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
No. 11-1256
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Jerome B. Friedman, Senior
District Judge. (2:10-cv-00316-JBF-TEM)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Betty Jefferson and the Norfolk Federation of Teachers
(NFT) filed the instant 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) action in the
district court, alleging that the School Board of the City of
Norfolk
(the
School
Board)
violated
School
Board
represented
motion
to
(b)(6).
by
violated
NFT.
dismiss
In
Fourteenth
the
rights
response,
pursuant
Jeffersons
to
Fed.
the
R.
of
other
School
Civ.
individuals
Board
P.
filed
12(b)(1)
and
the
district
courts
dismissal,
Jefferson
for
leave
to
file
second
amended
complaint.
The
We affirm.
On
appeal,
Jefferson
and
NFT
raise
three
issues:
district
court
erred
in
finding
that
NFT
lacked
its
judgment
to
allow
Jefferson
and
NFT
to
file
an
amended
complaint.
This court reviews de novo a district courts grant of
a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
Corp.
v.
Twombly,
550
U.S.
544,
555,
570
Bell
(2007).
Veney v.
Wyche, 293 F.3d 726, 730 (4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation
marks omitted).
To establish a violation of procedural due process,
Jefferson must have alleged that (1) she had a property interest
(2)
of
which
the
process of law.
School
Board
deprived
her
(3)
without
due
have
constitutionally
employment.
protected
property
interest
in
their
542, 546 (1985); Andrew v. Clark, 561 F.3d 261, 269 (4th Cir.
2009).
employment
public
may
school
derive
from
teachers
a
property
contract
which
interest
provides
in
for
hearing
would
have
been
meaningless
because,
she
We find
This court
Cir. 2009).
Because NFT lacks standing to sue in its own right, as
it has suffered no injury in fact, it must attain associational
standing in order to proceed.
Adver. Commn, 432 U.S. 333, 342-43 (1977) (Even in the absence
of injury to itself, an association may have standing solely as
the representative of its members. (internal quotation marks
omitted)).
requested
members
in
Stasko,
282
the
requires
suit.
F.3d
315,
the
Friends
320
participation
for
(4th
Ferrell
Cir.
of
individual
Parkway,
2002).
LLC
Neither
v.
party
Therefore,
reveals
that
the
relief
sought
for
the
Our
associations
complaint
otherwise
concerns
only
Jeffersons
specific
See Warth v.
Therefore,
NFT
and
Jefferson
assert
that
the
district
courts
denial
of
motion
district
This court
to
amend
The
Id. at 427.
conclusion
that
the
district
court
abused
its
59(e)
motion.
Matrix
Capital
Mgmt.
Fund,
LP
v.
BearingPoint, Inc., 576 F.3d 172, 193 (4th Cir. 2009) (internal
quotation marks omitted).
did not abuse its discretion in denying the Rule 15(b) motion to
amend, as we agree with the district court that such amendment
would have been futile.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court.
legal
are
adequately
6
presented
in
the
materials
before
the
court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED