Azaniah Blankumsee v. RICKY FOXWELL, Warden of ECI

20-6295United States Court Of Appeals For The 4th Circuit28 de jul. de 2020

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6295

AZANIAH BLANKUMSEE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

RICKY FOXWELL, Warden of ECI; ROBERT TROXELL, CDM; DALE
CHILDERS, Correctional Officer; ANTOINETTE PERRY, CPT at ECI; MEDICAL
DEPARTMENT AT ECI,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:18-cv-00106-PWG)

Submitted: July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Azaniah Blankumsee, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Conrad Meister, Gina Marie Smith,
MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale Park, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:

In his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) action, Azaniah Blankumsee appeals the district
court’s orders (1) granting summary judgment to Defendants Ricky Foxwell, Robert
Troxell, Dale Childers, and Antoinette Perry; and (2) dismissing the claims against the
Medical Department at ECI, but granting Blankumsee 28 days to file a more definite
statement providing the names of the individuals or parties that allegedly harmed him.
*

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Blankumsee v. Foxwell, No. 8:18-cv-00106-PWG (D.
Md. Jan. 10, 2019; filed Feb. 7, 2020 & entered Feb. 10, 2020). 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

*
The district court entered a final judgment dismissing Blankumsee’s complaint on
April 7, 2020. Although Blankumsee’s appeal was interlocutory at the time he filed his
notice of appeal, we now have jurisdiction to consider the appeal under the doctrine of
cumulative finality. See Houck v. Substitute Tr. Servs., Inc., 791 F.3d 473, 479 (4th Cir.
2015).

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.