Reuter v. Washington County Supervisors
Reuter v. Washington County Supervisors
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1981
JOSE F. REUTER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WASHINGTON COUNTY SUPERVISORS; GREGORY I. SNOOK, President; DAVID ENGLE, Director, Washington County Department of Social Services; JOHN KENNEDY, Program Manager; PAULA PRICE, LCSW-C Adult Protection Agency, Washington County Department of Social Services; ANN BUSHONG, Case Manager Supervisor, Washington County Department of Social Services; LYNN M. SMITH, Case Manager, Washington County Department of Social Services; ALICE SENCINDIVER, RN, Washington County Health Department; BRENDA MILLER, Washington County Hospital Home Health Care; ELISE CULLER, Director as Superior Respondent; RAY BELEN, Physical Therapist Home Health Care, CAROLYN FLEENOR, Home Health Care; IFY ONYIA, Director Superior Respondent, MARTA FEIGLY; SUSAN J. MCDONALD, Washington County Commission of Aging; TIMOTHY S. GORDON, P. A.; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE; DAWN MORALES; JUDY BARRON,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
PAUL THEODONI, M.D., in his individual and official capacity,
Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:06-cv-00334-CCB)
Submitted: November 21, 2006 Decided: November 28, 2006
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jose F. Reuter, Appellant Pro Se. Kirk Chalis Downey, OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, Hagerstown, Maryland; Elise Song Kurlander, Christopher A. Gozdor, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; William John Hickey, Rockville, Maryland; James Sunderland Aist, ANDERSON, COE & KING, Baltimore, Maryland; John Michael Quinn, ETHRIDGE, QUINN, MCAULIFFE, ROWAN & HARTINGER, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 - PER CURIAM:
Jose F. Reuter appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his
42 U.S.C. § 1983(2000) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. Reuter v. Washington
County Supervisors, No. 1:06-cv-00334-CCB (D. Md. Aug. 30, 2006).
We further grant Reuter’s unopposed motion to dismiss Paul
Theodoni, M.D., as a party to the appeal. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished