Demesme v. Montgomery County
Demesme v. Montgomery County
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-2283
EMMANUEL J. DEMESME, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
CAROLYN BIGGINS; GRAHAM J. NORTON,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97- 1112-L)
Submitted: February 8, 2000 Decided: March 14, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric Steele, Michael C. Watson, LAW OFFICES OF ERIC STEELE, Wash- ington, D.C., for Appellant. Charles W. Thompson, Jr., County At- torney, Karen L. Federman Henry, Principal Counsel for Appeals, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Emmanuel J. DeMesme, Jr. appeals the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to Montgomery County on DeMesme’s
42 U.S.C.A. § 1983(West Supp. 1999) claim alleging due process vio-
lations and employment discrimination. We have reviewed the record
and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error.
DeMesme failed to present evidence to support his allegations that
Montgomery County violated his substantive due process rights. See
County of Sacramento v. Lewis,
523 U.S. 833(1998). DeMesme also
failed to present evidence to support a prima facie case of em-
ployment discrimination. See St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks,
509 U.S. 502, 506(1993). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished