Filed: Sep. 11, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1415 MARK C. LOVE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH F. MURPHY, JR.; DEBORAH S. EYLER; ARRIE W. DAVIS; PETER B. KRAUSER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 02-682-CCB) Submitted: August 9, 2002 Decided: September 11, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1415 MARK C. LOVE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH F. MURPHY, JR.; DEBORAH S. EYLER; ARRIE W. DAVIS; PETER B. KRAUSER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 02-682-CCB) Submitted: August 9, 2002 Decided: September 11, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per c..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1415 MARK C. LOVE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOSEPH F. MURPHY, JR.; DEBORAH S. EYLER; ARRIE W. DAVIS; PETER B. KRAUSER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 02-682-CCB) Submitted: August 9, 2002 Decided: September 11, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark C. Love, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mark C. Love appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for temporary and permanent injunctive relief and subsequent dismissal of his civil action. We have reviewed the record, Love’s brief, and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Love v. Murphy, No. CA-02-682-CCB (D. Md. Mar. 8 & Apr. 1, 2002). We deny Love’s request for oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
