Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Germain v. Sondervan, 03-7868 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-7868 Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 01, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7868 JEAN D. GERMAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM SONDERVAN, Commissioner; THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; JAMES S. SMITH, SR., Chief of Security; RORY WISE, Captain; WILLIAM MORANT, Lieutenant; BERNARD JONES, Captain; CAPTAIN ORANGE; DARRYL PUGH, Corporal; JAMES FLOWERS, Corporal, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr.,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7868 JEAN D. GERMAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM SONDERVAN, Commissioner; THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; JAMES S. SMITH, SR., Chief of Security; RORY WISE, Captain; WILLIAM MORANT, Lieutenant; BERNARD JONES, Captain; CAPTAIN ORANGE; DARRYL PUGH, Corporal; JAMES FLOWERS, Corporal, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-3513-1-WDQ) Submitted: October 1, 2004 Decided: November 1, 2004 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jean D. Germain, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Stanley Street, Assistant Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jean D. Germain appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Germain v. Sondervan, No. CA-02-3513-1-WDQ (D. Md. filed Oct. 29, 2003; entered Oct. 30, 2003). 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