Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    MacCado v. Kane, 4th Cir. (2005)

    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 the defendants in Nigel MacCado's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its October 7, 2004 opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    MacCado v. Kane, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendants in Nigel MacCado's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its October 7, 2004 opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-02-16 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7693

    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 the defendants in Nigel MacCado's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its October 7, 2004 opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    MacCado v. Kane, 4th Cir. (2005)

    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 the defendants in Nigel MacCado's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights lawsuit. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its October 7, 2004 opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed 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. 04-7693

    NIGEL MACCADO,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CAPTAIN KANE; STEVE WILLIAMS,
    Dorchester County Jail,

    Warden

    of
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
    (CA-04-479-AW)

    Submitted:

    February 9, 2005

    Decided:

    February 16, 2005

    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Nigel MacCado, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Bock Karpinski, Matthew


    Douglas Peter, ALLEN, KARPINSKI, BRYANT & KARP, Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Nigel MacCado appeals the district courts order granting
    summary judgment for the Defendants on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000)
    complaint.
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

    district court. See MacCado v. Kane, No. CA-04-479-AW (D. Md. Oct.
    7, 2004).

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before


    the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like