Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Oliva v. State of Maryland, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Thomas Oliva and Louis J. De Maio appealed a district court decision dismissing their complaint alleging civil violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act against the State of Maryland. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in its decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the record adequately presented the case and argument would not aid the decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-11-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-1976

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Thomas Oliva and Louis J. De Maio appealed a district court decision dismissing their complaint alleging civil violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act against the State of Maryland. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in its decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the record adequately presented the case and argument would not aid the decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Oliva v. State of Maryland, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Thomas Oliva and Louis J. De Maio appealed a district court decision dismissing their complaint alleging civil violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act against the State of Maryland. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in its decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the record adequately presented the case and argument would not aid the decision.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 03-1976

    THOMAS OLIVA; LOUIS J. DE MAIO,


    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA03-1936-JFM)

    Submitted:

    November 6, 2003

    Decided:

    November 20, 2003

    Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Thomas Oliva, Louis J. De Maio, Appellants Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Thomas Oliva and Louis J. De Maio appeal the district courts
    order dismissing their complaint alleging civil violations of the
    Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act under 18 U.S.C.
    1961 (2000), et seq.

    We have reviewed the record and find no

    reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by


    the district court.

    See Oliva v. Maryland, No. CA-03-1936-JFM (D.

    Md. July 10, 2003).


    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like