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)
22-6057•Warren Matthew Giddings v. Montgomery County, Maryland
22-6057Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 29, 2022
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6057
WARREN MATTHEW GIDDINGS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. (1:21-cv-00959-GJH)
Submitted: April 26, 2022 Decided: April 29, 2022
Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Warren Matthew Giddings, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Warren Matthew Giddings appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Giddings v.
Montgomery Cnty., No. 1:21-cv-00959-GJH (D. Md. Dec. 15, 2021). 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.