Holsey v. Kastendieck
This text of Holsey v. Kastendieck (Holsey v. Kastendieck) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 95-7419
AARON HOLSEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RICHARD KASTENDIECK, Individually and as Assistant Attorney General for the State of Maryland; SANDRA BOOSE, Individually and as Case Management Supervisor at the central laundry facility; MARK WILSON, Individually and as a Case Management Specialist II assigned at the central laundry facility, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2360-K)
Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 17, 1996
Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. Holsey v. Kastendieck, No. CA-95-2360-K (D. Md. Aug. 21, 1995). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Holsey v. Kastendieck, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holsey-v-kastendieck-ca4-1996.