Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Holsey v. Hornbecker, 98-6797 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-6797 Visitors: 10
Filed: Dec. 02, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6797 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HORNBECKER, individually and as Facility Administrator; CHARNEY CAIN, individually and as Supervisor of Classification Department; HILL, individually and as a Classification Counselor; RICHARD LANHAM, individually and as Commissioner of the Division of Corrections; EARL BESHEARS, individually and as Warden; GEORGE KALAROUMAKIS, individually and as Facility Administrator; DIRE
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6797 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HORNBECKER, individually and as Facility Administrator; CHARNEY CAIN, individually and as Supervisor of Classification Department; HILL, individually and as a Classification Counselor; RICHARD LANHAM, individually and as Commissioner of the Division of Corrections; EARL BESHEARS, individually and as Warden; GEORGE KALAROUMAKIS, individually and as Facility Administrator; DIRECTOR OF CLASSIFI- CATION, individually also (Name Unknown) at Department of Corrections Headquarters, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-2422-JFM) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Wendy Ann Kronmiller, Assistant Attorney General, Balti- more, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Aaron Holsey appeals the district court’s orders denying re- lief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. 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. Holsey v. Hornbecker, No. CA-97-2422-JFM (D. Md. Apr. 16 and May 7, 1998). 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 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