Opinion
22-2306
10-02-2023
LYNN SNYDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; STATE OF MARYLAND; DARION BRANHAM; DANIEL HOUCK, Defendants-Appellees.
Neil R. Lebowitz, LEBOWITZ LAW FIRM, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant. Anthony G. Brown, Attorney General, DeNisha A. Watson, Carolyn M. Frank, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: September 28, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-00930-CCB)
Neil R. Lebowitz, LEBOWITZ LAW FIRM, Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant.
Anthony G. Brown, Attorney General, DeNisha A. Watson, Carolyn M. Frank, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lynn Snyder appeals the district court's orders (1) granting Defendants' motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on Snyder's employment and tort claims; and (2) denying Snyder's Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it converted Defendants' motion to a summary judgment motion. See E.W. by &through T.W. v. Dolgos, 884 F.3d 172, 178 n.2 (4th Cir. 2018) ("We generally review a district court's conversion of a motion to dismiss to a summary judgment motion for abuse of discretion."). Further, we discern no error in the district court's decision to grant Defendants summary judgment and thus affirm the district court's orders. Snyder v. Md. Dep't of Transp., State Highway Admin., No. 1:21-cv-00930-CCB (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2022; Nov. 22, 2022). 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.