U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2013

Wayne Resper v. Derek Baer

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 30, 2013 · Duncan, Keenan, Per Curiam, Wynn

540 F. App'x 223

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Resper appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006) as barred by the statute of limitations. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. See Resper v. Baer, No. 8:13-cv-00024-PJM (D.Md. Jan. 15 & Mar. 26, 2013). In addition, we note that “in Maryland, following the voluntary dismissal of a civil action without prejudice, a second complaint based upon the same facts still must be filed within the applicable limitations period.” Sheng Bi v. Gibson, 205 Md.App. 263, 45 A.3d 305, 309 (2012). * 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.

Federal courts must apply the forum state’s rules for tolling the statute of limitations. Bd. of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U.S. 478, 483-84, 100 S.Ct. 1790, 64 L.Ed.2d 440 (1980).

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