Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-02457/USCOURTS-ca4-19-02457-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Raymond J. Bly
Appellant
Circuit Court for Howard County
Appellee
J. Does
Appellee
Lenore Gelfman
Appellee
Wayne A. Robey
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-2457

RAYMOND J. BLY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, as an agency and instrumentality of 

the State of Maryland; WAYNE A. ROBEY, Individually and in his official capacity 

as Clerk of the Circuit Court for Howard County, MD; HONORABLE LENORE 

GELFMAN, individually and in her official capacity as Administrative Judge of the 

Circuit Court for Howard County, MD; J. DOES, One or more individuals sued in 

his or her or their individual capacities, and in his or her or their respective capacities 

as state agents or actors directed or knowingly permitted to perpetrate acts and/or 

omissions knowingly and intentionally violative,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

George L. Russell, III, District Judge; J. Mark Coulson, Magistrate Judge. (1:18-cv-01333-

JMC)

Submitted: May 21, 2020 Decided: May 26, 2020

Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2457 Doc: 18 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Raymond J. Bly, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Dudek, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY 

GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2457 Doc: 18 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Raymond J. Bly filed a civil action in the district court alleging that the Defendants 

improperly denied access to court records relating to his 1987 Maryland criminal 

convictions. Bly appeals (1) the district court’s order granting in part the Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss; (2) the magistrate judge’s order* granting summary judgment to the 

Defendants on Bly’s First Amendment right of access claim; and (3) the magistrate judge’s 

order denying Bly’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion and his motion for sanctions. We have 

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

stated by the lower court. Bly v. Cir. Ct. for Howard Cnty., Md., No. 1:18-cv-01333-JMC 

(D. Md. June 26, 2019, Oct. 9, 2019, & Dec. 4, 2019). 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

* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(c) (2018).

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2457 Doc: 18 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 3 of 3