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)
13-7993•Charlie Matthews v. Valerie Murray; Dr. Colin Ottey; William Beeman; Greg Flury; Lisa Schindler
13-7993Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 5, 2014
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7993
CHARLIE MATTHEWS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VALERIE MURRAY; DR. COLIN OTTEY; WILLIAM BEEMAN; GREG FLURY;
LISA SCHINDLER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
(1:13-cv-00059-RDB)
Submitted: February 27, 2014 Decided: March 5, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charlie Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Michelle Jacquelyn
Marzullo, Richard P. Seitz, MARKS, O’NEILL, O’BRIEN, DOHERTY &
KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland; Gina Marie Smith, MEYERS, RODBELL
& ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Charlie Matthews appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Matthews v. Murray, No. 1:13-cv-00059-RDB (D. Md. Dec.
4, 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.