Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jay Hawkins v. Isiah Leggett, 13-2236 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-2236 Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2236 In re: MARY KAY CANARTE - JAY HAWKINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ISIAH LEGGETT; MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; ARTHUR M. WALLENSTEIN, Director; MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; ARTHUR M. WALLENSTEIN, Personally, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:12-cv-00623-AW) Submitte
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2236 In re: MARY KAY CANARTE ------------------------------------ JAY HAWKINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ISIAH LEGGETT; MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; ARTHUR M. WALLENSTEIN, Director; MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; ARTHUR M. WALLENSTEIN, Personally, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:12-cv-00623-AW) Submitted: February 21, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jay Hawkins, Appellant Pro Se. Patricia Prestigiacomo Via, Paul F. Leonard, Jr., COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Jay Hawkins appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the Appellees, dismissing his employment discrimination complaint and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hawkins v. Leggett, No. 8:12-cv-00623-AW (D. Md. June 24, 2013; Sept. 10, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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