523 F. App'x 204
4th Cir.2013Background
- Nofsinger was dismissed from VCU's graduate physical therapy program after a failing clinical grade in a USPT-affiliated course.
- VCU had an affiliation agreement with USPT under which Nofsinger enrolled in a required clinical instruction course conducted by a USPT employee.
- Nofsinger filed suit in district court naming VCU, USPT, and five VCU faculty members.
- The district court granted motions to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
- Claims included due process, equal protection, breach of contract against USPT, and contract claims against VCU and individual defendants; Eleventh Amendment issues were raised concerning VCU.
- The Fourth Circuit affirmed, upholding dismissal on the grounds discussed below.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Due process protected interest | Nofsinger argues she had a protected enrollment interest and was denied due process. | Defendants contend no protected interest and adequate process was provided. | No protected interest shown; process adequate; claim dismissed. |
| Equal protection claim | Nofsinger asserts differential treatment by VCU based on animus; others similarly situated were treated differently. | Defendants contend failure to show similarly situated comparisons or discriminatory motive. | Failed to show how others were similarly situated or discriminatory intent; claim rejected. |
| Breach of contract against USPT | USPT breached the affiliation agreement as an intended third-party beneficiary. | USPT did not make the ultimate decisions about grades or dismissal; no breach by USPT. | Correctly dismissed; no breach by USPT established. |
| Breach of contract against VCU and individuals | Nofsinger alleges contract breaches by VCU and individual defendants. | District court properly dismissed; no pleaded breach against individuals; Eleventh Amendment issues apply to VCU. | Dismissed; Eleventh Amendment bar on contract claims against VCU; individual claims not pleaded. |
| Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity | Nofsinger seeks relief against a state actor in civil action. | VCU did not consent to suit; immunity bars the action. | Sovereign immunity bars contract claims against VCU. |
Key Cases Cited
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422 (1982) (two-step due process inquiry)
- Morrison v. Garraghty, 239 F.3d 648 (4th Cir. 2001) (equal protection requires similarly situated treatment and purposeful discrimination)
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (equal protection requires similarly situated treatment)
- Aziz v. Alcolac, Inc., 658 F.3d 388 (4th Cir. 2011) (Twombly plausibility standard applied to state-law and federal claims)
- Francis v. Giacomelli, 588 F.3d 186 (4th Cir. 2009) (pleading standards for Rule 12(b)(6) analysis)
- Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265 (1986) (sovereign immunity considerations in federal suits against states)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleading claims)