Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Edward L. Dutton v. Montgomery County Government Officer Preissig, 110 F.3d 59, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Edward Dutton filed a lawsuit against Montgomery County Government and Officer Preissig alleging he was physically abused while being detained at a courthouse for disrupting a criminal proceeding. A jury ruled against Dutton. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's verdict, finding that the district court did not err in denying Dutton's request to call the judge from the disrupted proceeding as a witness, as the judge did not witness the disputed actions and a tape of the proceeding contained all of the judge's statements.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-04-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 110 F.3d 59 Docket: 96-1653

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Edward Dutton filed a lawsuit against Montgomery County Government and Officer Preissig alleging he was physically abused while being detained at a courthouse for disrupting a criminal proceeding. A jury ruled against Dutton. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's verdict, finding that the district court did not err in denying Dutton's request to call the judge from the disrupted proceeding as a witness, as the judge did not witness the disputed actions and a tape of the proceeding contained all of the judge's statements.

    Copyright:

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

    Edward L. Dutton v. Montgomery County Government Officer Preissig, 110 F.3d 59, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Edward Dutton filed a lawsuit against Montgomery County Government and Officer Preissig alleging he was physically abused while being detained at a courthouse for disrupting a criminal proceeding. A jury ruled against Dutton. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's verdict, finding that the district court did not err in denying Dutton's request to call the judge from the disrupted proceeding as a witness, as the judge did not witness the disputed actions and a tape of the proceeding contained all of the judge's statements.

    Copyright:

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

    110 F.

    3d 59

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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.
    Edward L. DUTTON, Plaintiff--Appellant,
    v.
    MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT; Officer
    Preissig,
    Defendants--Appellees.
    No. 96-1653.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: March 27, 1997.
    Decided: April 2, 1997.

    Edward L. Dutton, Appellant Pro Se. Linda B. Thall, Senior Assistant


    County Attorney, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Edward L. Dutton appeals the jury verdict against him in this action. Because
    Dutton was disrupting a criminal proceeding in state court, he was handcuffed
    in the hallway and taken into custody for a short time, before he was released at
    the courthouse. He alleges that he was physically abused during this period.
    Dutton challenges the district court's ruling that he could not call as a witness
    the judge whose trial was disrupted. But the disputed actions took place outside
    the judge's presence, and a tape which was played before the jury contained all
    the judge's statements at the time. Therefore, the district court did not err in
    denying Dutton's request to call the judge as a witness. We affirm the judgment
    against Dutton rendered by the jury. 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