Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cason v. MD Division of Corr, 03-6369 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-6369 Visitors: 16
Filed: May 27, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6369 MARC S. CASON, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION; MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION; EMSA CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL CARE SERVICES, WARDEN, MHC Annex (1997); CHIEF OF SECURITY, MHC Annex (1997); UNNAMED CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS; GEORGE E. REEDE, JR.,; THERESITA JACKSON, Warden MHC-X (1997); CHIEF OF SECURITY, MHC X (1997); ROBERT WEEKS, CO II; RICHARD THOMAS, CO II; UNNAMED CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL, De
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6369 MARC S. CASON, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION; MARYLAND HOUSE OF CORRECTION; EMSA CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL CARE SERVICES, WARDEN, MHC Annex (1997); CHIEF OF SECURITY, MHC Annex (1997); UNNAMED CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS; GEORGE E. REEDE, JR.,; THERESITA JACKSON, Warden MHC-X (1997); CHIEF OF SECURITY, MHC X (1997); ROBERT WEEKS, CO II; RICHARD THOMAS, CO II; UNNAMED CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 00-2115-CCB) Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 27, 2003 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marc S. Cason, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marc S. Cason appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cason v. Maryland Div. of Corr., No. CA-00-2115-CCB (D. Md. May 3, 2001 & Jan. 31, 2003). We dispense with 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer