Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-08-02377/USCOURTS-ca4-08-02377-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-2377

CLAUDE HOLLAND; LORI HOLLAND,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

STATE OF MARYLAND; R. HUNTER NELMS, JR.; ROBERT VAN METER, 

Major,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

WICOMICO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:07-

cv-03040-AMD)

Submitted: March 23, 2010 Decided: April 6, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit 

Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robin R. Cockey, COCKEY, BRENNAN & MALONEY, P.C., Salisbury, 

Maryland, for Appellants. Douglas F. Gansler, Attorney General 

Appeal: 08-2377 Doc: 34 Filed: 04/06/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

of Maryland, H. Scott Curtis, Assistant Attorney General, 

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 08-2377 Doc: 34 Filed: 04/06/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Claude and Lori Holland, husband and wife, filed suit 

against Defendants alleging state and federal law causes of 

action relating to Claude’s suspension and termination from his 

position with the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Office. The 

district court granted summary judgment for Defendants finding 

the Hollands’ claims were barred by res judicata. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Holland 

v. Maryland, No. 1:07-cv-03040-AMD (D. Md. Dec. 5, 2008). 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

Appeal: 08-2377 Doc: 34 Filed: 04/06/2010 Pg: 3 of 3