Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Karl Krey v. United States, 17-1886 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-1886 Visitors: 35
Filed: Aug. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1886 KARL HEINZ KREY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:15-cv-03800-DKC) Submitted: July 30, 2018 Decided: August 17, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 17-1886


KARL HEINZ KREY,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                    Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:15-cv-03800-DKC)


Submitted: July 30, 2018                                          Decided: August 17, 2018


Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Dmitri A. Chernov, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Stephen M. Schenning, Acting
United States Attorney, Sarah A. Marquardt, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Karl Heinz Krey appeals the district court’s order dismissing his case for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction based on the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort

Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2680(a) (2012). We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Krey v. United States, No. 8:15-cv-03800-DKC (D. Md. June 28, 2017). 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




                                              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