Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Frank Neff v. CMS, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Frank Neff filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against CMS, the warden, and the medical department. The district court denied relief and Neff appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision. All of Neff's pending motions for relief were denied and oral arguments were not held as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the filings. The appeals court upheld the district court's denial of Neff's complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Frank Neff v. CMS, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Frank Neff filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against CMS, the warden, and the medical department. The district court denied relief and Neff appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision. All of Neff's pending motions for relief were denied and oral arguments were not held as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the filings. The appeals court upheld the district court's denial of Neff's complaint.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-04-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-7513

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Frank Neff filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against CMS, the warden, and the medical department. The district court denied relief and Neff appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision. All of Neff's pending motions for relief were denied and oral arguments were not held as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the filings. The appeals court upheld the district court's denial of Neff's complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    Frank Neff v. CMS, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Frank Neff filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against CMS, the warden, and the medical department. The district court denied relief and Neff appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's decision. All of Neff's pending motions for relief were denied and oral arguments were not held as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the filings. The appeals court upheld the district court's denial of Neff's complaint.

    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. 11-7513

    FRANK M. NEFF,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    CMS; WARDEN; MEDICAL DEPT,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
    (1:11-cv-00582-RDB)

    Submitted:

    March 29, 2012

    Decided:

    April 3, 2012

    Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Frank M. Neff, Appellant Pro Se. Philip Melton Andrews, Jeremy


    C. B. Wyatt, KRAMON & GRAHAM, PA, Baltimore, Maryland; Stephanie
    Judith
    Lane-Weber,
    Assistant
    Attorney
    General,
    Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Frank

    M.

    Neff

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint.


    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    Neff

    v.

    CMS,

    No.

    1:11-cv-00582-RDB

    Oct. 31, 2011, and entered Nov. 1, 2011).

    (D.

    Md.

    filed

    We deny all of Neffs

    pending motions for relief and 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

    You might also like