Cornell Cornish v. Baltimore City

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Cornell Cornish v. Baltimore City

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1709

CORNELL D.M. JUDGE CORNISH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BALTIMORE CITY; CITY COUNCIL; MAYOR AND PRESIDENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:14-cv-03117-GLR)

Submitted: October 20, 2015 Decided: October 22, 2015

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cornell D.M. Judge Cornish, Appellant Pro Se. Frederic Nelson Smalkin, Jr., Assistant Solicitor, BALTIMORE CITY LAW DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Cornell D.M. Judge Cornish appeals the district court’s

orders dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim

upon which relief could be granted, and denying reconsideration.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Cornish v. Balt. City, No. 1:14-cv-03117-GLR (D. Md. May

15, 2015, June 26, 2015). We grant Cornish’s motion for leave

to file a reply brief exceeding this Court’s length limitations

and deny his motion to add copyrighted work to the appeal. 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

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished