From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Catlett v. Cnty. of Worcester

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 30, 2012
473 F. App'x 329 (4th Cir. 2012)

Opinion

No. 11-7689

05-30-2012

IRVIN HANNIS CATLETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COUNTY OF WORCESTER; PHILLIP FORT, Sgt., Defendants - Appellees, and STATE OF MARYLAND; JOEL TODD, States Attorney, Defendants.

Irvin Hannis Catlett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Breads, Jr., Hanover, Maryland; Nichole Cherie Gatewood, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:11-cv-00162-PJM)

Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Irvin Hannis Catlett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Breads, Jr., Hanover, Maryland; Nichole Cherie Gatewood, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Irvin Hannis Catlett 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. Catlett v. Worcester, No. 8:11-cv-00162-PJM (D. Md. Nov. 29, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

Catlett v. Cnty. of Worcester

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 30, 2012
473 F. App'x 329 (4th Cir. 2012)
Case details for

Catlett v. Cnty. of Worcester

Case Details

Full title:IRVIN HANNIS CATLETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COUNTY OF WORCESTER…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 30, 2012

Citations

473 F. App'x 329 (4th Cir. 2012)