Davis v. Maryland

Fourth Circuit

Davis v. Maryland

530 F. App'x 265

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 25, 2013

DocketNo. 13-1157

StatusPublished

This text of 530 F. App'x 265 (Davis v. Maryland) 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.

Bluebook

Davis v. Maryland, 530 F. App'x 265 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Duane Gerald Davis, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his civil action. Davis titled his action as a “Complaint for Fraud, Unlawful Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and for Declaratory Relief,” in which he also sought mandamus relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Davis leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Maryland, No. 1:12-cv-03570-GLR (D.Md. Jan. 11, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Duane Gerald Davis, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his civil action. Davis titled his action as a “Complaint for Fraud, Unlawful Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and for Declaratory Relief,” in which he also sought mandamus relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Davis leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Maryland, No. 1:12-cv-03570-GLR (D.Md. Jan. 11, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

530 F. App'x 265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-maryland-ca4-2013.