Bailey v. Anne Arundel County
This text of Bailey v. Anne Arundel County (Bailey v. Anne Arundel County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1458
DENNIS BAILEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-4044-H)
Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 3, 2003
Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dennis Bailey, Appellant Pro Se. William Davidson Evans, Jr., Senior Assistant County Attorney, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Dennis Bailey appeals the district court’s order granting Anne
Arundel County’s motion for summary judgment and denying relief on
his discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Bailey v. Anne Arundel County, No. CA-01-4044-
H (D. Md. Mar. 14, 2003). 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bailey v. Anne Arundel County, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-anne-arundel-county-ca4-2003.