Reniel Meyler v. Mayor and City Council of Ocean City

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: November 20, 2025
• Docket: 24-1622
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1622 Doc: 25 Filed: 11/20/2025 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1622

RENIEL ADRIAN MEYLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY; CORPORAL MATTHEW FOREMAN; POLICE OFFICER NORRIS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Senior District Judge. (1:23-cv-00082-JKB)

Submitted: August 29, 2025 Decided: November 20, 2025

Before AGEE, HARRIS, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Fatai A. Suleman, FAS LAW FIRM, LLC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Bruce F. Bright, AYRES, JENKINS, GORDY, & ALMAND, P.A., Ocean City, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1622 Doc: 25 Filed: 11/20/2025 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Raniel Adrien Meyler appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment

to Appellees on Meyler’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law tort claims and dismissing without

prejudice, after declining to exercise jurisdiction over, the remaining state law claim under

the Maryland Declaration of Rights. On appeal, Meyler challenges the grant of summary

judgment to Appellees on his claims. We review de novo a district court’s grant of

summary judgment, “viewing all facts and reasonable inferences in the light most favorable

to the nonmoving party.” Ballengee v. CBS Broad., Inc., 968 F.3d 344, 349 (4th Cir. 2020).

Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as

to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 56(a). “A fact is material if it might affect the outcome of the suit under the

governing law, and a genuine dispute exists if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury

could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Aleman v. City of Charlotte, 80 F.4th 264,

283 (4th Cir. 2023) (citation modified). Conversely, “[w]hen a party fails to establish the

existence of an element essential to that party’s case, there is no genuine issue of material

fact.” Perkins v. Int’l Paper Co., 936 F.3d 196, 205 (4th Cir. 2019).

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Meyler v. Mayor and City Council

of Ocean City, No. 1:23-cv-00082-JKB (D. Md. June 5, 2024).

2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1622 Doc: 25 Filed: 11/20/2025 Pg: 3 of 3

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED