Filed: Mar. 08, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2294 STARSHA M. SEWELL, A Natural Person and Resident of Maryland On Behalf of Herself and Her African American Son’s, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, A Natural Person, acting as a Federal Judge In the United States of America, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:16-cv-03256-JKB) Submitted: March 3,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2294 STARSHA M. SEWELL, A Natural Person and Resident of Maryland On Behalf of Herself and Her African American Son’s, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, A Natural Person, acting as a Federal Judge In the United States of America, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:16-cv-03256-JKB) Submitted: March 3, 2..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2294 STARSHA M. SEWELL, A Natural Person and Resident of Maryland On Behalf of Herself and Her African American Son’s, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, A Natural Person, acting as a Federal Judge In the United States of America, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:16-cv-03256-JKB) Submitted: March 3, 2017 Decided: March 8, 2017 Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Starsha M. Sewell, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Starsha M. Sewell appeals the district court’s orders dismissing this civil action and denying her motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sewell v. Chasanow, No. 1:16-cv-03256- JKB (D. Md. Sept. 29, Oct. 7, Oct. 17 & Oct. 24, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
