Case Name: Richard PEAMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Bill Norris; Michael Rich, Plaintiffs, v. A AND R DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-28
Citations: 279 F. App'x 220
Docket Number: No. 08-1242
Parties: Richard PEAMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Bill Norris; Michael Rich, Plaintiffs, v. A AND R DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 279
Pages: 220–220

Head Matter:
Richard PEAMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Bill Norris; Michael Rich, Plaintiffs, v. A AND R DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 08-1242.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 22, 2008.
Decided: May 28, 2008.
Richard Peamon, Appellant Pro Se. Paula Jeanette McGill, Washington, D.C.; Paul D. Shelton, McKennon, Shelton, & Henn, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Richard Peamon appeals the district court's orders granting A & R Development's motions to set aside an entry of default, for a protective order, and for summary judgment on Peamon's civil negligence action, which alleged inadequate security at his apartment complex. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Peamon v. A & R Dev. Corp., No. 1:06-cv02974-WMN (D. Md. Mar. 20, 2007; Apr. 19, 2007; Feb. 7, 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.