Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Asemani v. Chronister, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Billy G. Asemani against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for granting summary judgment to defendants. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-03-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7865

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Billy G. Asemani against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for granting summary judgment to defendants. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views2 pages

    Asemani v. Chronister, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Billy G. Asemani against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for granting summary judgment to defendants. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    Certiorari dismissed, June 21, 2010

    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-7865

    BILLY G. ASEMANI,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    MR. CHRONISTER, Corrections Officer, Eastern Correctional
    Institution-East ("ECI-E"); MS. PARKS, Correctional Officer,
    ECI-E; MS. JOSEPH, Sergeant, ECI-E; MR. WEBSTER, Lieutenant,
    ECI-E, in their individual and official capacities; OFFICER
    DAVIS; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
    (1:09-cv-00238-RDB)

    Submitted:

    March 16, 2010

    Decided:

    March 22, 2010

    Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Billy G. Asemani, Appellant Pro Se.


    Stephanie Judith Lane
    Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Billy
    district

    G.

    courts

    Asemani,
    order

    frequent

    granting

    filer,

    summary

    appeals

    judgment

    to

    the
    the

    Defendants on Asemanis action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006).


    We

    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    Asemani v. Chronister, No. 1:09-cv-00238-RDB (D. Md.

    court.

    Sept. 21, 2009).


    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the


    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like