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)
17-1702•Redmond Howard v. SALISBURY UNIVERSITY, Member of the University System of Maryland
17-1702Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 2, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1702
REDMOND HOWARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SALISBURY UNIVERSITY, Member of the University System of Maryland;
KONSTANTINE KYRIACOPOULOS, Associate Professor in the Department of
Teacher Education; CHIN-HSIU CHEN, Chair of Department/Assistant Professor
of Early Childhood Education; GEORGE OAKLEY; KEVIN BOWES; JOHN
PAUL REHO; CARLTON INSLEY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00260-JKB)
Submitted: September 28, 2017 Decided: October 2, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Redmond Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Paul Reinhart, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Redmond Howard appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion and dismissing Howard’s civil action for failure to state a claim.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we
grant Howard’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Howard v. Salisbury Univ., No. 1:17-cv-00260-JKB (D. Md. June
1, 2017). We deny Howard’s motions for permission to appeal, to waive a specific
defense, to defer action on his previous motion to waive a defense, and to add a
defendant. 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.