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)
99-2674•Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr v. Baltimore County Maryland District Court
99-2674Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 29, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-2674
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BALTIMORE COUNTY MARYLAND DISTRICT COURT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-
99-3587-S)
Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 29, 2000
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999)
complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. See Wilder v. Baltimore County
Maryland District Court, No. CA-99-3587-S (D. Md. Dec. 6, 1999).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
tions 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.