Castro v. New York City Board
Case Date: 08/04/1992
Docket No: 92-1357
|
August 4, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] ___________________ No. 92-1357 ELIGIO CASTRO, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. _________________ No. 92-1482 ELIGIO CASTRO, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. __________________ APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Jaime Pieras, Jr., U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ___________________ Before Breyer, Chief Judge, ___________ Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge, ____________________ and Cyr, Circuit Judge. _____________ ___________________ Eligio Castro on brief pro se. _____________ Robert Abrams, Attorney General of the State of New York, _____________ and Jeffrey I. Slonim, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for _________________ appellees New York City Board of Education, et al. O. Peter Sherwood, Corporation Counsel of the City of New _________________ York, Stephen J. McGrath, Peter J. Cahill and Kristin M. Helmers __________________ _______________ __________________ on brief for appellee New York City Board of Education. Daniel Lopez-Romo, United States Attorney, and Rebecca __________________ _______ Vargas-Vera, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for ___________ appellee Secretary of the United States Department of Education. __________________ __________________ Per Curiam. We agree with the district court's February __________ 11, 1992 opinion and affirm the judgment of dismissal substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Since the action was properly dismissed, the district court did not err in denying injunctive relief. Consequently, the March 19, 1992 order denying injunctive relief is summarily affirmed. Appellant's motion to perfect diversity jurisdiction and other requests are denied. Because these appeals are frivolous, double costs are awarded to appellees. Affirmed. ________ -3- |