Filed: Dec. 30, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1828 WELLELA HIRPASSA, Individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Brook T. Genet and for the use of R.B., a minor, and B.B., a minor, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY GOVERNMENT; DELVON MONTUE, Cpl; TROY WALLACE, Cpl; LOUIS WILLIAMS, Cpl; THOMAS HAMMILL, Cpl; ASMOREM BERHE; ADRIEN LYLE ROBINSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Mar
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1828 WELLELA HIRPASSA, Individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Brook T. Genet and for the use of R.B., a minor, and B.B., a minor, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY GOVERNMENT; DELVON MONTUE, Cpl; TROY WALLACE, Cpl; LOUIS WILLIAMS, Cpl; THOMAS HAMMILL, Cpl; ASMOREM BERHE; ADRIEN LYLE ROBINSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Mary..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1828 WELLELA HIRPASSA, Individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Brook T. Genet and for the use of R.B., a minor, and B.B., a minor, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY GOVERNMENT; DELVON MONTUE, Cpl; TROY WALLACE, Cpl; LOUIS WILLIAMS, Cpl; THOMAS HAMMILL, Cpl; ASMOREM BERHE; ADRIEN LYLE ROBINSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:09-cv-02631-RWT) Submitted: December 14, 2010 Decided: December 30, 2010 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wellela Hirpassa, Appellant Pro Se. Tonia Yvetta Belton-Gofreed, Associate County Attorney, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wellela Hirpassa appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants on Hirpassa’s complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hirpassa v. Prince George’s County Gov’t, No. 8:09-cv-02631-RWT (D. Md. July 9, 2010). 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