Filed: Nov. 23, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1492 MICHAEL ENDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHLEEN CRAVEDI, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 03-245-PJM) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Enders,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1492 MICHAEL ENDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHLEEN CRAVEDI, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA- 03-245-PJM) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Enders, A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1492
MICHAEL ENDERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
KATHLEEN CRAVEDI,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA-
03-245-PJM)
Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 23, 2004
Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Enders, Appellant Pro Se. Allan A. Noble, BUDOW & NOBLE,
P.C., Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Michael Enders appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his civil action, denying his motion for
reconsideration, and awarding attorney’s fees to Kathleen Cravedi.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Enders v. Cravedi, No. CA-03-245-PJM (D. Md. filed
Oct. 21, 2003 & entered Oct. 22, 2003; filed Jan. 15, 2004 &
entered Jan. 16, 2004; Mar. 10, 2004). 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 -