Michael McNeil v. State of Maryland ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-2139
    MICHAEL A. MCNEIL,
    Plaintiff – Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF MARYLAND; HOWARD COUNTY, Maryland; HOWARD COUNTY
    CIRCUIT COURT; DIANE O. LEASURE, Chief Administrative
    Judge, in her Official and Individual Capacity; LOUIS A.
    BECKER, III, Associate Judge, in his Official Capacity;
    MARY M. KRAMER, Master in Chancery, in her Official
    Capacity; LISA S. MOHINK, Family Law Coordinator, in her
    Official and Individual Capacity; PATRICIA BRIGHT, Court
    Social Worker, in her Official and Individual Capacity;
    CHRISTINIA BIEGANSKI, Supervised Visitation Center Manager,
    in her Official and Individual Capacity; SUSAN R. GNATT,
    Supervisory Court Reporter, in her Official and Individual
    Capacity; STEPHEN A. DRAZIN; PETER V. MARKUSKI, JR.;
    SARAH P. MCNEIL; VINCENT LOVE; M. SLUTSKY & ASSOCIATES,
    INC.,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.    Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District
    Judge. (8:11-cv-02495-DKC)
    Submitted:   January 17, 2013             Decided:   January 22, 2013
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Michael A. McNeil, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Scott Curtis, OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Louis
    Paul Ruzzi, HOWARD COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Ellicott City,
    Maryland; Stephen A. Drazin, Columbia, Maryland; Jeffrey Wayne
    Bernstein, GOOZMAN, BERNSTEIN & MARKUSKI, Laurel, Maryland;
    Sarah P. McNeil, Ellicott City, Maryland; Timothy J. Mummert,
    Ferndale, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Michael A. McNeil appeals the district court’s order
    denying   relief    on    his    
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
         (2006)    complaint      and
    related   claims.         We    have    reviewed   the     record    and     find    no
    reversible     error.       Accordingly,        although    we    grant     leave    to
    proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
    the district court.            McNeil v. Maryland, No. 8:11-cv-02495-DKC
    (D. Md. Aug. 22, 2012).           We deny McNeil’s motion to strike the
    Appellees’ briefs and 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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-2139

Filed Date: 1/22/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014