U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1997

Saysay v. Robe

Saysay v. Robe
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 13, 1997

Saysay v. Robe

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7761

AMOS SAYSAY, a/k/a Amos Sayson, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES ROBE, Chief of Police, Howard County; MARY LEVY, employee of Howard County Police Department, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 96-1996-DKC) Submitted: January 28, 1997 Decided: February 13, 1997 Before HALL, ERVIN, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Amos Saysay, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara McFaul Cook, County Solici- tor, Frank Todd Taylor, COUNTY SOLICITOR'S OFFICE, Ellicott City, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994). To the ex- tent Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his equal protection claims without prejudice, we dismiss for lack of juris- diction. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993). As for Appellant's other claims, we have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the remainder of the order on the reasoning of the district court. Saysay v. Robe, No. CA-96-1996-DKC (D. Md. Oct. 9, 1996). We dispense with oral argu- ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.