Court Opinion

ID: 9902079
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-22 21:00:49.930336+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:44.630006
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1475      Doc: 26         Filed: 11/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1475

        CODI EVANS,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        MARYLAND NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS & PLANNING COMMISSION;
        CHIEF DARRYL MCSWAIN; CAPTAIN MICHAEL MURPHY; MICHAEL
        RILEY; CAPTAIN DARIN UHRIG, individually and in their Official Capacity with
        the Maryland-National Capital Park Police,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Matthew James Maddox, Magistrate Judge. (8:19-cv-02651-MJM)

        Submitted: November 16, 2023                                Decided: November 21, 2023

        Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Cary J. Hansel, Ashton Zylstra, HANSEL LAW, PC, Baltimore, Maryland,
        for Appellant. Amy L. Foster, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL-M-NCPPC, Riverdale,
        Maryland; Elissa D. Levan, LEVAN RUFF LLC, Annapolis, Maryland; M. Celeste Bruce,
        Madelaine Kramer Katz, RIFKIN WEINER LIVINGSTON LLC, Bethesda, Maryland;
        Joseph M. Creed, BRAMNICK CREED, LLC, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1475      Doc: 26        Filed: 11/21/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Codi Evans appeals the magistrate judge’s * order granting Defendants summary

        judgment on his numerous employment related claims. Through counsel, Evans challenges

        only the court’s dismissal of his hostile work environment racial harassment claims, which

        were brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981. We have reviewed the record and find no

        reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s order. Evans v. Md. Nat’l

        Cap. Parks & Planning Comm’n, No. 8:19-cv-02651-MJM (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2023). 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, pursuant to 28
        U.S.C. § 636(c).

                                                    2