Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Nnoli v. State of Maryland, 96-7785 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-7785 Visitors: 23
Filed: Feb. 05, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7785 EMMANUEL NNOLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; WILLIAM C. MILLER, Honor- able Judge; PAUL H. WEINSTEIN, Honorable Judge; JAMES TRIMM, Master; RAYMOND M. KIGHT, Sheriff; ANDREW L. SONNER, Esquire; JOHN P. GALLEY, Warden, Montgomery County Detention Center; ALAN DAVID MEISELMAM, Esquire, and his law firm, Alan Meiselmam, Incorporated; ALAN J. NUTA, Esquire, and his law firm, Lan J. Nuta, Incorporated; R
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7785 EMMANUEL NNOLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; WILLIAM C. MILLER, Honor- able Judge; PAUL H. WEINSTEIN, Honorable Judge; JAMES TRIMM, Master; RAYMOND M. KIGHT, Sheriff; ANDREW L. SONNER, Esquire; JOHN P. GALLEY, Warden, Montgomery County Detention Center; ALAN DAVID MEISELMAM, Esquire, and his law firm, Alan Meiselmam, Incorporated; ALAN J. NUTA, Esquire, and his law firm, Lan J. Nuta, Incorporated; RICHARD S. MCKERNON, Esquire, or his estate; NNENNAYA NNOLI, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 95-2750-PJM) Submitted: January 23, 1997 Decided: February 5, 1997 Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emmanuel Nnoli, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Penny Whiteford, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore Maryland; Linda B. Thall, Senior Assis- tant County Attorney, David Eugene Stevenson, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland; Robert William Hesselbacher, Jr., SEMMES, BOWEN & SEMMES, Baltimore, Maryland; Alvin Ira Frederick, ECCLESTON & WOLF, Baltimore, Maryland; Charles Stephen Rand, MCKERNON & RAND, Rockville, Maryland; Patrick J. Hoover, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Ac- cordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nnoli v. Maryland, No. CA-95-2750-PJM (D. Md. Oct. 10, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately presented in the materials before the 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