Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 42 views

    Steven Bradford v. Jason Clem, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Steven Karl Edward Bradford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two defendants which was denied by the district court. Bradford appealed the district court's denial. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Steven Bradford v. Jason Clem, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    42 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Steven Karl Edward Bradford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two defendants which was denied by the district court. Bradford appealed the district court's denial. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-10-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6860

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Steven Karl Edward Bradford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two defendants which was denied by the district court. Bradford appealed the district court's denial. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Steven Bradford v. Jason Clem, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. Steven Karl Edward Bradford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two defendants which was denied by the district court. Bradford appealed the district court's denial. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6860

    STEVEN KARL EDWARD BRADFORD,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    JASON CLEM, Dr., Medical Director; CARL OLTMAN, Physician's
    Assistant,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    William D. Quarles, Jr., District
    Judge. (1:13-cv-02506-WDQ)

    Submitted:

    October 21, 2014

    Decided:

    October 24, 2014

    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Steven Karl Edward Bradford, Appellant Pro Se.


    Gina Marie
    Smith, MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale, Maryland, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Steven
    courts

    order

    complaint.
    error.

    Karl

    Edward

    denying

    relief

    Bradford
    on

    his

    appeals

    42

    the

    U.S.C.

    district

    1983

    (2012)

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma

    pauperis,

    we

    affirm

    for

    the

    reasons

    stated

    by

    the

    district

    court.

    Bradford v. Clem, No. 1:13-cv-02506-WDQ (D. Md. May 22,

    2014).

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    legal
    before

    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like