Gordon v. Chase

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedAugust 1, 2005
Docket05-1246
StatusUnpublished

This text of Gordon v. Chase (Gordon v. Chase) 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
Gordon v. Chase, (4th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1246

EARL S. GORDON, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

HARRY CHASE, Executive Director; MARYLAND HEALTH CARE DEPARTMENT; WHITEHEAD, TAYLOR AND PRESTON L.L.P.; LOUIE W. SHAW, Attorney; RICHARD KIDWELL; ELIAS ZERHOUNI, MD; RONALD PETERSON, CEO; SHEILA SHETHS, MD; ARTHUR BURNETT, MD; URSELA WESSELMAN, MD; RAY STUTZMAN, MD; PAMELA COLEMAN, MD; BOU AND BOU; GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; ALFRED F. BELCUORE; ALEX KLADAKIS, Doctor; GREATER BALTIMORE MEDICAL CENTER; L. H. HARRIS, MD; PAUL BARNETT, MD; ALAN BELZBURG, MD; THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-04- 1013-AMD)

Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 1, 2005

Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Earl S. Gordon, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Earl S. Gordon appeals the district court’s orders

denying relief on his civil complaint and denying his motion for

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. See Gordon v. Chase, No. CA-04-1013-AMD (D.

Md. June 18, 2004; filed Feb. 17, 2005 & entered Feb. 22, 2005).

Gordon’s motion for a restraining order is denied. 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

- 2 -

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gordon v. Chase, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-chase-ca4-2005.