Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Glendora v. Jacobs, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views4 pages
    1) Glendora filed a civil rights complaint against numerous defendants which was denied by the district court. 2) The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The 4th Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in their April 30, 2003 decision, and determined that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-08-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-1764

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Glendora filed a civil rights complaint against numerous defendants which was denied by the district court. 2) The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The 4th Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in their April 30, 2003 decision, and determined that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views4 pages

    Glendora v. Jacobs, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Glendora filed a civil rights complaint against numerous defendants which was denied by the district court. 2) The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The 4th Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in their April 30, 2003 decision, and determined that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-1764

    GLENDORA,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DENNIS JACOBS; JOHN M. WALKER, JR.; ROSEANN B.
    MACKECHNE; BERNARD F. MADSEN, JR.; RALPH
    GARGULIO,
    Physicians
    Assistant;
    SUBHASH
    KULKARNI; HUDSON VALLEY EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN;
    LEROY PHILLIPS; ASHOK SHAH; ASGHAR ANWAR;
    HUDSON VALLEY CRITICAL CARE PHYSICIANS, PC;
    DIANE KANTAROS; JAMES SCADUTO; DANIEL CAPURRI;
    DANIEL M. PHILBIN; LAWRENCE S. SCHEK; KHURRZM
    I. ASHRAF; TACONIC CARDIOTHORACIC SURGEONS;
    PETER ZAKOW; HUDSON VALLEY UROLOGY; HUDSON
    VALLEY RADIOLOGY PC; BRYAN YEN; DONALD LIEN;
    MARK R. BRADY; BENJAMIN SECKLER; PHILIP
    AMATULLE; HENRY J. FISCHER, JR.; JOSEPH
    ANTONIO; JACK I. HENTZEL; GOLDSTEIN W. ZEV;
    VASSAR BROTHERS MEDICAL CENTER; NCO FINANCIAL
    SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED, f/k/a The Revenue
    Maximization Group, Incorporated; DANIEL P.
    SICCONE; PAUL LAPLANTE; REGGIE ANDERSON;
    DIANNE BENNETT; CHARLES F. DOLAN; JAMES L.
    DOLAN; MACK BUDILL; THOMAS GARGER; CHARLES A.
    FORMZ; CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORPORATION; ROBERT
    CALLAWAY; SATTERLEE, STEPHENS, BURKE & BURKE;
    DEZNELL REECE TACHZ; PAUL J. KELLY, JR.;
    JUDICIAL COUNCIL; HARRIS I. HARTZ; PATRICK
    FISCHER; AUDREY WEIGEL; HUG; OSCANLAIN;
    TASHIMA; CATHY CATTERSON; JEFF CROCKER; ROBERT
    W. DOYLE; ROBERT A. LIFSON; KENNETH W.
    RUDOLPH; NANCY SUNSHINE; WILLIAM W. WILKINS;
    BOYCE F. MARTIN; LAURI BZTTANANI; JAMES O.
    ROBBINS; COX COMMUNICATIONS, INCORPORATED;
    CAROL B. AMON; J. L. EDMONDSON; ROBERT E.
    GERBER; SHELLEY C. CHAPMAN; KAREN MURPHY,

    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-031166-MJG)

    Submitted:

    August 14, 2003

    Decided:

    August 20, 2003

    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Glendora, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Glendora appeals the district courts order denying relief on
    her civil rights complaint.

    We have reviewed the record and find

    no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated


    by the district court.

    See Glendora v. Jacobs, No. CA-03-1166-MJG

    (D. Md. Apr. 30, 2003).

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like