Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
17-7168•Chauncey Bennett v. Warden John Wolfe
17-7168Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit11.01.2018
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-7168
CHAUNCEY BENNETT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN JOHN WOLFE; LIEUTENANT RUBY WHITE; LIEUTENANT
VALERIE STYLES; LIEUTENANT TROXELL; STEPHEN T. MOYER,
Secretary,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:17-cv-00302-JKB)
Submitted: December 20, 2017 Decided: January 11, 2018
Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chauncey Demetrius Bennett, Appellant Pro Se. Teresa Marie Kelly, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Chauncey Demetrius Bennett appeals the district court’s order granting summary
judgment to defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Bennett v. Wolfe, No. 1:17-cv-00302-JKB (D. Md.
Aug. 18, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.