Court Opinion

ID: 9396907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-23 21:00:58.442697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:20.130142
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1922      Doc: 8         Filed: 05/22/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-1922

        DAVID Q. WEBB,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        MICHAEL KLINE, Mayor; HILARY A. CROTHERS-MOORE, Commissioner;
        CORPORAL DENNIS R. WOOD, Police Officer; STEPHEN YATES,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J.
        Mark Coulson, Magistrate Judge. (1:22-cv-00008-JMC)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                             Decided: May 22, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        David Q. Webb, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1922       Doc: 8         Filed: 05/22/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               David Q. Webb appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying his motion for

        reconsideration of the denial of his motion to disqualify the magistrate judge. 1 Webb also

        appeals the magistrate judge’s subsequent order granting Defendants summary judgment

        in Webb’s civil action, in which he alleged that Defendants violated his First, Fourth, and

        Fourteenth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and discriminated against him on

        the basis of race, color, and national origin, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act

        of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7; and denying as moot Webb’s motions for

        judgment on the pleadings, to change the name of a party under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, and for

        “request for decision.” 2 We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

        Accordingly, we deny Webb’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm the magistrate judge’s

        orders. Webb v. Kline, No. 1:22-cv-00008-JMC (D. Md. Aug. 23 & 26, 2022). 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

               1
                This case was decided by a magistrate judge with the parties’ consent pursuant to
        28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
               2
                Although Webb did not file a new or an amended notice of appeal following the
        magistrate judge’s order granting Defendants summary judgment and denying as moot
        Webb’s remaining motions, Webb’s supplemented informal brief serves as the functional
        equivalent of a notice of appeal from that order. See Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49
        (1992).

                                                      2