The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-1779•Doyle R. Ham, Jr. v. Department of Public Safety
14-1779Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 26, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1779
DOYLE R. HAM, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES;
DAYENA CORCOREN; JOHN WOLFE; JOHN LOTTICH; GARY MAYNARD;
PAULA GREEN-HOLT; CYNTHIA BRISCOE; BRUCE CHAPMAN; BRENDA
SHELL-ELEAZER; RODNEY BURGER; MARGARET CHIPPENDALE; BRIAN
KAUFFMAN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge.
(1:13-cv-03501-JKB)
Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 26, 2015
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Doyle R. Ham, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Judith Ann Barr, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Pikesville, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Doyle R. Ham, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his complaint for failing to state a claim. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ham v.
Dep’t of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs., No. 1:13-cv-03501-JKB (D.
Md. filed July 10, 2014 & entered July 11, 2014). We also deny
Ham’s motion for injunctive relief. 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.