Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Keisha Brown v. Prince George's Hospital, 11-1741 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 11-1741 Visitors: 29
Filed: Dec. 19, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1741 KEISHA L. BROWN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE'S HOSPITAL; DIMENSIONS HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; PAMELA DURNING; BEVERLY CALLOWAY; UCHENNA NWANERI; ARTHUR HOWARD; DARRYL ATWELL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:09- cv-00295-RWT) Submitted: December 15, 2011 Decided: December 19, 2011 Before GREGORY, SHED
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1741 KEISHA L. BROWN, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PRINCE GEORGE'S HOSPITAL; DIMENSIONS HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; PAMELA DURNING; BEVERLY CALLOWAY; UCHENNA NWANERI; ARTHUR HOWARD; DARRYL ATWELL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:09- cv-00295-RWT) Submitted: December 15, 2011 Decided: December 19, 2011 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keisha L. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Bruce Wallace, WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDLEMAN, & DICKER, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Stephanie D. Kinder, LAW OFFICES OF STEPHANIE D. KINDER, Baltimore, Maryland; Anu Kmt, KEMET AND HUNT PLLC, College Park, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Keisha L. Brown appeals the district court’s orders dismissing as untimely her defamation claims accruing prior to February 8, 2008, and granting summary judgment on her remaining claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Brown v. Prince George’s Hospital, No. 8:09-cv-00295-RWT (D. Md., Nov. 4, 2009 & June 9, 2011). We further deny Brown’s motion for the appointment of counsel. 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