Filed: Aug. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1384 RAYMOND J. BLY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND; CLERK OF THE COURT WAYNE A. ROBEY; ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE LENORE R. GELFMAN; CHIEF JUDGE UNKNOWN NAME, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-GLR) Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 20, 2018 Before WYNN
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1384 RAYMOND J. BLY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND; CLERK OF THE COURT WAYNE A. ROBEY; ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE LENORE R. GELFMAN; CHIEF JUDGE UNKNOWN NAME, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-GLR) Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 20, 2018 Before WYNN ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1384 RAYMOND J. BLY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND; CLERK OF THE COURT WAYNE A. ROBEY; ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE LENORE R. GELFMAN; CHIEF JUDGE UNKNOWN NAME, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00306-GLR) Submitted: August 16, 2018 Decided: August 20, 2018 Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymond J. Bly, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Raymond J. Bly appeals the district court’s order construing his civil action as a petition for a writ of mandamus and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bly v. Circuit Ct. for Howard Cty., No. 1:18-cv-00306-GLR (D. Md. Feb. 7, 2018). 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
