Lay v. Maryland

Fourth Circuit

Lay v. Maryland

449 F. App'x 275

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 5, 2011

DocketNo. 11-6705

StatusPublished

This text of 449 F. App'x 275 (Lay 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

Lay v. Maryland, 449 F. App'x 275 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John R. Lay appeals the district court’s order construing his pro se pleading as a petition for a writ of mandamus and denying it. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Lay leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lay v. State of Maryland, No. 1:11-cv-01178-BEL (D.Md. May 10, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court [276]*276and 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

John R. Lay appeals the district court’s order construing his pro se pleading as a petition for a writ of mandamus and denying it. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Lay leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lay v. State of Maryland, No. 1:11-cv-01178-BEL (D.Md. May 10, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court [276]*276and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

449 F. App'x 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lay-v-maryland-ca4-2011.