Filed: Feb. 13, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2113 ROSE ISBELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STEPHEN FRIEDMAN; JOSEPH, GREENWALD AND LAAKE, PA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cv-01152-AW) Submitted: February 9, 2012 Decided: February 13, 2012 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rose Isbe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2113 ROSE ISBELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STEPHEN FRIEDMAN; JOSEPH, GREENWALD AND LAAKE, PA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cv-01152-AW) Submitted: February 9, 2012 Decided: February 13, 2012 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rose Isbel..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2113 ROSE ISBELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STEPHEN FRIEDMAN; JOSEPH, GREENWALD AND LAAKE, PA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cv-01152-AW) Submitted: February 9, 2012 Decided: February 13, 2012 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rose Isbell, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Michael Creed, Veronica B. Nannis, JOSEPH, GREENWALD & LAAKE, PA, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rose Isbell appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Isbell v. Friedman, No. 8:11-cv-01152-AW (D. Md. filed Sept. 16, 2011, entered Sept. 19, 2011). 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
