Mesays v. Hugel

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mesays v. Hugel. Read the opinion of the Court — 110 F. App'x 369
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 18, 2004·No. 04-1723·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1723

KAMIL A. MESAYS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DAVID H. HUGEL, ADMINISTRATOR MARYLAND MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA- 04-1570-RDB)

Submitted: September 17, 2004 Decided: October 18, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kamil A. Mesays, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Kamil A. Mesays appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his complaint without prejudice. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Mesays v. Hugel, No.

CA-04-1570-RDB (D. Md. May 28, 2004). 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

Mesays v. Hugel, (4th Cir. 2004).

Mesays v. Hugel (Mesays v. Hugel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.