1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. SAMPSON v. CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
 

SAMPSON v. CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT

No. 3:14-CV-62 (CAR).

REGERO SAMPSON, Plaintiff, v. CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT; CLARKE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, in their Official Capacity: DR. DENISE A. SPANGLER, VERNON PAYNE, LINDA E. DAVIS, CARL PARKS, SARAH F. ELLIS, CHARLES WORTHY, CAROL S. WILLIAMS, DAVID HUFF, OVITA THORNTON, SHELLY GOODMAN, and ANGIE MOON DE AVILA, in their Individual and Official Capacities, Defendants.

United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Athens Division.

November 4, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

REGERO SAMPSON, Plaintiff, represented by JOHN MELL CLARK .

CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY .

CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, in its official capacity, Defendant, represented by HIEU M NGUYEN .

CLARKE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

DR DENISE A SPANGLER, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

VERNON PAYNE, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

LINDA E DAVIS, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

CARL PARKS, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

SARAH F ELLIS, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

CHARLES WORTHY, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

CAROL S WILLIAMS, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

DAVID HUFF, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

OVITA THORNTON, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

SHELLY GOODMAN, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

ANGIE MOON DE AVILA, Defendant, represented by PHILLIP L HARTLEY & HIEU M NGUYEN .

ORDER ON MOTION TO REMAND

C. ASHLEY ROYAL, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Regero Sampson's Motion to Remand [Doc. 4]. All of the above-named Defendants have responded and oppose the Motion. Having considered the Motion, the response thereto, and the applicable law, Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is GRANTED.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This action arises out of the...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases