The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-6377•James A. Butler v. STEPHEN DEWALT, Warden
05-6377Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 4, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6377
JAMES A. BUTLER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
STEPHEN DEWALT, Warden; CONTROLLER IN BUSINESS
OFFICE, DAY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District
Judge. (CA-04-3388-WMN)
Submitted: August 31, 2005 Decided: October 4, 2005
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James A. Butler, Appellant Pro Se. John Walter Sippel, Jr., OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
James A. Butler appeals the district court’s order
denying Butler’s petition for writ of mandamus. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. See Butler v.
DeWalt, No. CA-04-3388-WMN (D. Md. filed Feb. 16, 2005 & entered
Feb. 17, 2005). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.