Childs v. Schlitz

Fourth Circuit

Childs v. Schlitz

556 F.2d 1178

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 22, 1977·No. No. 76-2417·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Given immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 and required to testify in a criminal case, Lester Matz and Jerome B. Wolff, both professional engineers, asserted in the district court that the Maryland Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Professional Land Surveyors could not properly consider such testimony in determining whether to revoke their licenses to practice their profession. To do so, they assert, would violate their rights under the fifth amendment and the protection afforded by the federal immunity statute.

In a well reasoned opinion, the district court correctly rejected plaintiffs’ contentions. Childs v. McCord, 420 F.Supp. 428 (D.Md.1976). We adopt the opinion as our own and affirm the judgment.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Given immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 and required to testify in a criminal case, Lester Matz and Jerome B. Wolff, both professional engineers, asserted in the district court that the Maryland Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Professional Land Surveyors could not properly consider such testimony in determining whether to revoke their licenses to practice their profession. To do so, they assert, would violate their rights under the fifth amendment and the protection afforded by the federal immunity statute.

In a well reasoned opinion, the district court correctly rejected plaintiffs’ contentions. Childs v. McCord, 420 F.Supp. 428 (D.Md.1976). We adopt the opinion as our own and affirm the judgment.

AFFIRMED.

Childs v. Schlitz, 556 F.2d 1178 (4th Cir. 1977).

Pincite

556 F.2d 1178 (Childs v. Schlitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related