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)
10-6970•Larry Hamilton, Jr. v. Washington County Detention Center
10-6970Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 12, 2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6970
LARRY HAMILTON, JR.,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
WASHINGTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; VAN EVANS, Major;
CICCARELLI, Dr.; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; O. WAYNE HILL,
Warden; CARROLL PARRISH, Asst. Warden; O. WILLIAMS, R.N.;
DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS; PRIME MEDICAL CARE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge.
(8:09-cv-00516-RWT; 8:09-cv-00722-RWT)
Submitted: October 22, 2010 Decided: November 12, 2010
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry Hamilton, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Rodger Owen Robertson,
LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH M. JAGIELSKI, Baltimore, Maryland; David J.
McManus, Jr., BAXTER, BAKER, SIDLE, CONN & JONES, PA, Baltimore,
Maryland; Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Larry Hamilton, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint.
Appellee Evans has moved to dismiss, arguing Hamilton’s notice
of appeal was untimely. We deny Evans’s motion. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm the district court’s order. Hamilton v. Washington
Cty. Det. Ctr., Nos. 8:09-cv-00516-RWT; 8:09-cv-00722-RWT (D.
Md. May 26, 2010). 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.