Filed: Aug. 31, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1006 SCOTT STEELE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. FREDERICK MOTZ, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge, sitting by designation. (1:09-cv-00792-FPS) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1006 SCOTT STEELE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. FREDERICK MOTZ, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge, sitting by designation. (1:09-cv-00792-FPS) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1006 SCOTT STEELE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. FREDERICK MOTZ, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge, sitting by designation. (1:09-cv-00792-FPS) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Scott Steele, Appellant Pro Se. Judith Ann Kidwell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Scott Steele appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action against the district court judge who presided over a prior action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Steele v. Motz, No. 1:09- cv-00792-FPS (D. Md. Nov. 19, 2009). 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
