Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Ellis v. Secretary of Public, 96-6409 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6409 Visitors: 9
Filed: Sep. 03, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6409 ROBERT J. ELLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 96-6463 TERRY LEE BOBLETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 96-6464 CORNELIUS STRONG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PARRIS GLENDENING, Governor; MARVIN N. ROB- BINS, Director, Inmate Grievance Commission; WILLIAM SMITH, Warden of the Maryland House of Correction, Defe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6409 ROBERT J. ELLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 96-6463 TERRY LEE BOBLETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 96-6464 CORNELIUS STRONG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PARRIS GLENDENING, Governor; MARVIN N. ROB- BINS, Director, Inmate Grievance Commission; WILLIAM SMITH, Warden of the Maryland House of Correction, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-268-JFM, CA-96-490-JFM, CA-95-3369-JFM) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 3, 1996 Before HALL, MICHAEL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert J. Ellis, Terry Lee Boblett, Cornelius Strong, Appellants Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Attorney General, Richard Bruce Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal from the district court's orders denying re- lief on their 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) complaints. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ellis v. Secretary of Public Safety, No. CA-96-268-JFM (D. Md. Feb. 29, 1996); Boblett v. Secretary of Public Safety, No. CA- 96-490-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 1, 1996); Strong v. Glendening, No. CA-95- 3369-JFM (D. Md. Feb. 29, 1996). 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