Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Luy v. Baltimore Police Dept, 04-1994 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1994 Visitors: 39
Filed: Feb. 01, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1994 SOPHAL LUY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BALTIMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT; KEVIN CLARK, Police Commissioner; BARBARA MAGNASS, Lieutenant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-03-2833-CCB) Submitted: January 27, 2005 Decided: February 1, 2005 Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circu
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1994 SOPHAL LUY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BALTIMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT; KEVIN CLARK, Police Commissioner; BARBARA MAGNASS, Lieutenant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-03-2833-CCB) Submitted: January 27, 2005 Decided: February 1, 2005 Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sophal Luy, Appellant Pro Se. Kim Yvette Johnson, BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland; William Rowe Phelan, Jr., CITY OF BALTIMORE LAW DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland; Neal Marcellas Janey, Sr., THE JANEY LAW FIRM, PC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Sophal Luy appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil action against the Baltimore Police Department, Police Commissioner Kevin Clark, and Lieutenant Barbara Magnass. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Luy v. Baltimore Police Dep’t, No. CA-03-2833-CCB (D. Md. July 16, 2004; July 29, 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
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