Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cason v. M.D.P.S.C.S., 08-6931 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-6931 Visitors: 21
Filed: Aug. 22, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6931 MARC S. CASON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. M.D.P.S.C.S.; CMS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01024-CCB) Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 22, 2008 Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marc S. Cason, Ap
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6931 MARC S. CASON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. M.D.P.S.C.S.; CMS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01024-CCB) Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 22, 2008 Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marc S. Cason, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marc S. Cason appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cason v. M.D.P.S.C.S., No. 1:08-cv-01024- CCB (D. Md. May 9, 2008). Because the district court’s dismissal was Cason’s fourth strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2000) (“PLRA”),1 Cason may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2000). 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 * Although the district court’s order indicates that its dismissal constituted Cason’s third PLRA strike, a review of Cason’s numerous lawsuits reveals that Cason was previously issued three strikes. See Cason v. Weeks, No. 08-cv-00946-CCB (D. Md. May 7, 2008), aff’d, No. 08-6839 (4th Cir. July 28, 2008) (third strike); Cason v. Maryland Div. of Corr., No. 06-cv-2032 (D. Md. filed Aug. 21, 2006; entered Aug. 22, 2006) (second strike); Cason v. Maryland Div. of Parole and Probation, No. 06-cv-1186 (D. Md. May 17, 2006) (first strike). 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