956 F2d 1162 Clemens v. State of Maryland

956 F.2d 1162

Arthur J. CLEMENS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MARYLAND; Baltimore County; Howard County; James
E. Kardash; R. Roland Brockmeyer; Maryland Attorney
Grievance Commission; John Doe, I; John Doe, II; John
Doe, III; John Doe, IV; John Doe, V; John Doe, VI; John
H. Lewis, Jr.; J. Merson, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-1784.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 29, 1990.
Decided March 4, 1992.

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-88-2967-B)

Arthur J. Clemens, Jr., appellant pro se.

Lawrence H. Norton, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Md., Betty Ann Stemley, Assistant Attorney General, Pikesville, Md., John A. Austin, Assistant County Attorney, Towson, Md., Barbara McFaul Cook, County Solicitor, Ellicott City, Md., Shirlie Noris Lake, Eccleston & Wolf, Baltimore, Md., for appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:


Advertisement
view counter
1

Arthur J. Clemens, Jr. appeals from the district court's order which dismissed with prejudice his 27-count complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1985. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Clemens v. Maryland, No. CA-88-2967-B (D.Md.Apr. 10, 1990). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.