Case ID: f-appx_40/html/0870-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert E. MEADE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gail SCHAFFER, Judge; Judith Duck-ett, Judge; Nancy Phelps; The Orphans’ Court of Maryland for Anne Arundel County, Defendants-Appel-lees.
    No. 02-1549.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted July 18, 2002.
    Decided July 23, 2002.
    
      Robert E. Meade, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Robert E. Meade appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) 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. See Meade v. Schaffer, No. CA-02-1451-MJG (D.Md. Apr. 25, 2002). 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.