Filed: Aug. 25, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1583 STEVEN PAUL FLEMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee, and CROWNSVILLE HOSPITAL, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-98- 3933-MJG) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 25, 1999 Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpubli
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1583 STEVEN PAUL FLEMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee, and CROWNSVILLE HOSPITAL, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-98- 3933-MJG) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 25, 1999 Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublis..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1583 STEVEN PAUL FLEMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL, Defendant - Appellee, and CROWNSVILLE HOSPITAL, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-98- 3933-MJG) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 25, 1999 Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven Paul Fleming, Appellant Pro Se. David Alan Levin, Mary C. Rice, WHARTON, LEVIN, EHRMANTRAUT, KLEIN & NASH, Annapolis, Mary- land, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Steven Paul Fleming appeals the district court’s order dis- missing his civil action for a lack of jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Fleming v. Holy Cross Hospital, No. CA-98-3933-MJG (D. Md. Apr. 8, 1999). We dis- pense 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