Case Name: Karin Marie KENDRICK, Esq., Pro Se, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Hon. Colleen A. CAVANAUGH, Baltimore County Orphan's Court; Hon. Grace G. Connolly, Register of Wills, Baltimore County; Hon. Julie L. Ensor; Hon. R. Jay Fisher, Sheriff, Baltimore County; Officers John and Jane Doe, of the Baltimore County Sheriffs Office; State of Maryland, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-29
Citations: 470 F. App'x 194
Docket Number: No. 11-1865
Parties: Karin Marie KENDRICK, Esq., Pro Se, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Hon. Colleen A. CAVANAUGH, Baltimore County Orphan’s Court; Hon. Grace G. Connolly, Register of Wills, Baltimore County; Hon. Julie L. Ensor; Hon. R. Jay Fisher, Sheriff, Baltimore County; Officers John and Jane Doe, of the Baltimore County Sheriffs Office; State of Maryland, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 470
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
Karin Marie KENDRICK, Esq., Pro Se, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Hon. Colleen A. CAVANAUGH, Baltimore County Orphan’s Court; Hon. Grace G. Connolly, Register of Wills, Baltimore County; Hon. Julie L. Ensor; Hon. R. Jay Fisher, Sheriff, Baltimore County; Officers John and Jane Doe, of the Baltimore County Sheriffs Office; State of Maryland, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-1865.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 19, 2012.
Decided: March 29, 2012.
Karin Marie Kendrick, Appellant Pro Se. Hugh Scott Curtis, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Karin Marie Kendrick appeals the district court's order dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action as barred by absolute judicial immunity, derivative judicial immunity, and sovereign immunity. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kendrick v. Cavanaugh, No. 1:10-cv02207-CCB, 2011 WL 2837910 (D.Md. July 14, 2011). 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.