Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    Saradindu Mahapatra and Alok Kumar filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Geneva Convention on Human Rights against a Baltimore County police officer and a district court judge. The district court denied relief to the plaintiffs. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error, and also denied the plaintiffs' motion for a jury trial. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-11-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 101 F.3d 695 Docket: 96-1718

    Original Title

    Saradindu Mahapatra Alok Kumar v. R. Bradburn, Baltimore County Police G. Darrell Russell, Baltimore County District Court Judge, 101 F.3d 695, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Saradindu Mahapatra and Alok Kumar filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Geneva Convention on Human Rights against a Baltimore County police officer and a district court judge. The district court denied relief to the plaintiffs. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error, and also denied the plaintiffs' motion for a jury trial. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Saradindu Mahapatra and Alok Kumar filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Geneva Convention on Human Rights against a Baltimore County police officer and a district court judge. The district court denied relief to the plaintiffs. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error, and also denied the plaintiffs' motion for a jury trial. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    101 F.

    3d 695

    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.
    Saradindu MAHAPATRA; Alok Kumar, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
    v.
    R. BRADBURN, Baltimore County Police; G. Darrell Russell,
    Baltimore County District Court Judge, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 96-1718.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Nov. 7, 1996.
    Decided Nov. 18, 1996.

    Saradindu Mahapatra, Alok Kumar, Appellants Pro Se.


    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellants appeal the district court's order denying relief on their claims, which
    were brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1994) and the Geneva Convention on
    Human Rights. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
    and find no reversible error. Accordingly we affirm on the reasoning of the
    district court and deny Appellants' motion for a jury trial. Mahapatra v.
    Bradburn, No. CA-96-1168-L (D.Md. May 1, 1996). 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