Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Marinoff v. Duncan, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    Martin Marinoff filed an Americans with Disabilities Act claim against Douglas Duncan, an executive officer of Montgomery County Government. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant. Marinoff appealed. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the reasoning that summary judgment was appropriate. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-05-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-1066

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Martin Marinoff filed an Americans with Disabilities Act claim against Douglas Duncan, an executive officer of Montgomery County Government. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant. Marinoff appealed. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the reasoning that summary judgment was appropriate. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as 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
    5 views2 pages

    Marinoff v. Duncan, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Martin Marinoff filed an Americans with Disabilities Act claim against Douglas Duncan, an executive officer of Montgomery County Government. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant. Marinoff appealed. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error in the reasoning that summary judgment was appropriate. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 01-1066

    MARTIN MARINOFF,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DOUGLAS DUNCAN, Executive Officer, Montgomery
    County Government,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.
    (CA-00-2010-JFM)

    Submitted:

    May 17, 2001

    Decided:

    May 22, 2001

    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Martin Marinoff, Appellant Pro Se. Linda B. Thall, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Martin Marinoff appeals the district courts order granting
    Defendants motion for summary judgment in Marinoffs action under
    the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    We have reviewed the record

    and the district courts opinion and find no reversible error.


    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
    Marinoff v. Duncan, No. CA-00-2010-JFM (D. Md. Dec. 7, 2000).

    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