658 F.2d 257 (4th Cir. 1981), 81-1205, Ogilbee v. Western Dist. Guidance Center, Inc.
|Citation:||658 F.2d 257|
|Party Name:||David M. OGILBEE, Appellant, v. WESTERN DISTRICT GUIDANCE CENTER, INC., a non-profit corporation, and J. F. Brammer, Appellees.|
|Case Date:||September 02, 1981|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|
Argued July 13, 1981.
James M. Bradley, Jr., Parkersburg, W. Va., for appellant.
Herbert G. Underwood, Clarksburg, W.Va. (Steptoe & Johnson, Clarksburg, W. Va., Daniel A. Ruley, Jr., Parkersburg, W. Va., on brief), for appellees.
Before PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.
ERVIN, Circuit Judge:
David Ogilbee appeals the district court's dismissal of his section 1983 suit against his former employer, Western District Guidance Center (Western District). We affirm.
Western District is a non-profit corporation chartered by the state of West Virginia in 1966. It is operated and funded in part pursuant to West Va.Code § 27-2A-1, which authorizes and directs the state health director to establish comprehensive community mental health and mental retardation centers throughout the state and which allows the West Virginia Department of Health to contract with non-profit organizations for operation of those centers. Western District, through its board of directors, contracted with the state health department to operate a center for several West Virginia counties.
David Ogilbee was employed as the administrator of Western District from August 1971 until October 1979, when the corporation, acting through its president J. F. Brammer, terminated his services. In April 1980, Ogilbee sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for damages and for declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint alleged that Ogilbee's employment had been terminated by Brammer and Western District without prior notice or reason; that his subsequent requests for reasons for the dismissal and a demand for reinstatement had not been honored; that he had been denied any procedural safeguards, i. e., hearing, confrontation or review; and that his dismissal had been motivated by bad faith or malice and had been in contravention of public policy.
Upon Western District's motion, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b), the district court dismissed the complaint.
In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a complaint must allege facts sufficient to show deprivation, by virtue of state action, of a right...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP