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)
13-6891•Miss Catherine Denise Randolph v. DOUGLAS GANSLER, Maryland Attorney General; WILLIAM BROCKMAN, Deputy Solicitor General
13-6891Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 4, 2013
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6891
MISS CATHERINE DENISE RANDOLPH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DOUGLAS GANSLER, Maryland Attorney General; WILLIAM
BROCKMAN, Deputy Solicitor General,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:13-cv-01367-JFM)
Submitted: August 29, 2013 Decided: September 4, 2013
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Catherine Denise Randolph, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Catherine Denise Randolph appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we deny as moot Randolph’s motions to expedite and
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Randolph v. Gansler, No. 1:13-cv-01367-JFM (D. Md. May 13,
2013). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.