Court Opinion

ID: 989695
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:10:33.591264+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:43.229153
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

2BD ASSOCIATES LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP; A. JOHN BRISCUSO,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR QUEEN
ANNE'S COUNTY; WILLIAM V. RIGGS,
III, President, County
Commissioners for Queen Anne's
County; ARCHIBALD A.
MACGLASHAN, III, Vice-President,
County Commissioners for Queen
Anne's County; OSCAR A. SCHULZ,                No. 95-2763
Commissioner, County
Commissioners for Queen Anne's
County,
Defendants-Appellees,

and

MARION R. LEAVERTON, Chairman,
Board of Appeals for Queen Anne's
County; MICHAEL R. FOSTER,
Counsel to the Board of Appeals for
Queen Anne's County,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge.
(CA-94-698-K)

Argued: June 5, 1996

Decided: June 24, 1996
Before WIDENER, HALL, and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded with instructions by unpublished per curiam
opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

ARGUED: William D. Evans, Jr., Warren Kenneth Rich, RICH &
HENDERSON, P.C., Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellants. Richard
Timothy Colaresi, SHAPIRO & OLANDER, Annapolis, Maryland,
for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Judith Bernstein-Gaeta, SHAPIRO &
OLANDER, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Expressing no opinion on the merits of this case as presented, or
on the effect thereupon of Quackenbush v. Allstate Insurance
Company, No. 95-244, ___ U.S. ___ (June 3, 1996), we are of opin-
ion that the judgment of the district court should be vacated and this
case should be remanded for the district court to reconsider its entire
decision, especially including any effect thereupon had by
Quackenbush. In so doing, the district court may initiate such pro-
ceedings as it may deem appropriate.

VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS

                    2