Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Gross v. Lanham, 95-7738 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7738 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 14, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7738 DONALD SYLVESTER GROSS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHARD LANHAM, SR.; SEWALL SMITH; EUGENE NUTH; WILLIAM H. STRONG; LIEUTENANT FAW; STANLEY AUERBACK, Lieutenant; LIEUTENANT ROGERS; JESSE THOMPSON; DEBRA WARREN, Dietary Sergeant; DIETARY SERGEANT FOSTER; DIETARY SERGEANT GREEN; DIETARY SERGEANT MCCRAY; DIETARY SERGEANT CARTER; CORRECTIONAL DIETARY OFFICER JONES; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE, Dietary Staff in MCAC Dietary Dep
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7738 DONALD SYLVESTER GROSS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHARD LANHAM, SR.; SEWALL SMITH; EUGENE NUTH; WILLIAM H. STRONG; LIEUTENANT FAW; STANLEY AUERBACK, Lieutenant; LIEUTENANT ROGERS; JESSE THOMPSON; DEBRA WARREN, Dietary Sergeant; DIETARY SERGEANT FOSTER; DIETARY SERGEANT GREEN; DIETARY SERGEANT MCCRAY; DIETARY SERGEANT CARTER; CORRECTIONAL DIETARY OFFICER JONES; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE, Dietary Staff in MCAC Dietary Department from March of 1992 to the Present; MARIA MAXIMO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 95-684-S) Submitted: February 27, 1996 Decided: January 14, 1997 Before HALL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Sylvester Gross, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. 2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donald Sylvester Gross appeals an order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of some defendants and dismiss- ing the complaint with regard to the remaining defendants in Gross' 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 suit alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have considered the record and informal briefs of the parties, and we affirm the judgment for the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum opinion. Gross v. Lanham, No. 95-684-S (D. Md. Oct. 2, 1995). 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 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