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)
05-7279•Douglas Fauconier v. E. M. Shriner, C.o. Ii
05-7279Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 6, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7279
DOUGLAS FAUCONIER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
E. M. SHRINER, C.O. II; GROVES, C.O.
Lieutenant; STOLMEYER, C.O. Captain; COULTER,
C.O. Lieutenant,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA-
05-149-RDB)
Submitted: May 22, 2006 Decided: June 6, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Douglas Fauconier, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber,
Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Douglas Fauconier appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to Defendants and denying relief on his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. See Fauconier v. Shriner, No. CA-05-
149-RDB (D. Md. filed Aug. 2, 2005; entered Aug. 3, 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.