Holland v. State of Maryland

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 6, 2010
• Docket: 08-2377
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-2377

CLAUDE HOLLAND; LORI HOLLAND,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

STATE OF MARYLAND; R. HUNTER NELMS, JR.; ROBERT VAN METER, Major,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

WICOMICO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:07- cv-03040-AMD)

Submitted: March 23, 2010 Decided: April 6, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robin R. Cockey, COCKEY, BRENNAN & MALONEY, P.C., Salisbury, Maryland, for Appellants. Douglas F. Gansler, Attorney General of Maryland, H. Scott Curtis, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Claude and Lori Holland, husband and wife, filed suit

against Defendants alleging state and federal law causes of

action relating to Claude’s suspension and termination from his

position with the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Office. The

district court granted summary judgment for Defendants finding

the Hollands’ claims were barred by res judicata. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Holland

v. Maryland, No. 1:07-cv-03040-AMD (D. Md. Dec. 5, 2008). 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