Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Reuter v. Price, 05-1900 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1900 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 22, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1900 JOSE F. REUTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAULA PRICE, LCWS-C Adult Protection Agency; DAVID A. ENGLE, Director, Washington County Department of Social Services; ANN BUSHONG, Case Manager Supervisor, Washington County Department of Social Services; LYNN M. SMITH, Case Manager, Washington County Department of Social Services; JUDY VARROAN; ALICE SENDINDIVER, Department of Social Services; WASHINGTON COUNTY SUPERVISO
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1900 JOSE F. REUTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAULA PRICE, LCWS-C Adult Protection Agency; DAVID A. ENGLE, Director, Washington County Department of Social Services; ANN BUSHONG, Case Manager Supervisor, Washington County Department of Social Services; LYNN M. SMITH, Case Manager, Washington County Department of Social Services; JUDY VARROAN; ALICE SENDINDIVER, Department of Social Services; WASHINGTON COUNTY SUPERVISORS, Gregory I. Snook, President; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 05-1996-CCB) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 22, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jose F. Reuter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Jose F. Reuter appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice 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 Reuter v. Price, No. CA-05-1996-CCB (D. Md. Aug. 4, 2005). 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 - 3 -
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