Case Name: Leona VICTORS (Emenyonu); Home Care, Inc., a/k/a Leona's Heart Assisted Living, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Wendy A. KRONMILLER; Jane Wessely; Barbara Shannon; Ed Sadler, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-15
Citations: 397 F. App'x 893
Docket Number: No. 09-1531
Parties: Leona VICTORS (Emenyonu); Home Care, Inc., a/k/a Leona’s Heart Assisted Living, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Wendy A. KRONMILLER; Jane Wessely; Barbara Shannon; Ed Sadler, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 397
Pages: 893–893

Head Matter:
Leona VICTORS (Emenyonu); Home Care, Inc., a/k/a Leona’s Heart Assisted Living, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Wendy A. KRONMILLER; Jane Wessely; Barbara Shannon; Ed Sadler, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 09-1531.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 20, 2010.
Decided: Oct. 15, 2010.
Michael R. Carithers, Jr., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellants. Kathleen A. Ellis, Rhonda L. Stout, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland; Dale Barton Garbutt, Dennis M. Robinson, Jr., Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appel-lees.
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Leona Victors and Home Care, Inc., appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants on their civil action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Victors v. Kronmiller, No. 1:07-cv-02282-JFM, 2009 WL 971448 (D. Md. April 8, 2009). We grant the motion to waive appendix requirements and 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.