Marshall v. Kupec, (4th Cir. 2001)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7047 GREGORY MARSHALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus
ROBERT KUPEC, Warden, E.C.I.; DEBORAH PULLER,
Psychologist, E.C.I.; ROBERT D. RITCHEY,
Chief, E.C.I.; RAZAAK ENIOLA, Medical Direc-
tor, E.C.I.; KEITH MUIR, H.T., Officer, CO II,
E.C.I.; DOCTOR LINN, E.C.I.; KEVIN JOHNSON,
Nurse, E.C.I.; MR. JIM, L.P.N., Nurse, Pa-
tuxent; AMY HYMAN, Psychologist, Patuxent;
RAYMOND WILSON, Psychologist, Patuxent, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
(CA-00-3322-AW)
Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 5, 2001
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gregory Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney
General, Baltimore, Maryland; Philip Melton Andrews, Michael Joseph
Lentz, KRAMON & GRAHAM, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM
Gregory Marshall appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
Marshall v. Kupec , No. CA-00-3322-AW (D. Md. Jun e 6 & 12, 2001). 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. The motion for appointment of counsel is denied. AFFIRMED
Sponsored links
