Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Wilder v. Baltimore Cnty MD, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr. appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the Baltimore County Maryland District Court. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and district court opinion and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without needing oral argument. The unpublished opinion does not constitute binding precedent.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-03-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-2674

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr. appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the Baltimore County Maryland District Court. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and district court opinion and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without needing oral argument. The unpublished opinion does not constitute binding precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    Wilder v. Baltimore Cnty MD, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr. appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the Baltimore County Maryland District Court. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and district court opinion and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without needing oral argument. The unpublished opinion does not constitute binding precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 99-2674

    LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    BALTIMORE COUNTY MARYLAND DISTRICT COURT,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA99-3587-S)

    Submitted:

    March 23, 2000

    Decided:

    March 29, 2000

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., appeals the district courts
    order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1999)
    complaint.

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts

    opinion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm on

    the reasoning of the district court. See Wilder v. Baltimore County


    Maryland District Court, No. CA-99-3587-S (D. Md. Dec. 6, 1999).
    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

    You might also like