Judy Miskell v. Harry Chase
Judy Miskell v. Harry Chase
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1108
JUDY KAY MISKELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HARRY L. CHASE; WILLIAM L. HAUGH, JR., Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:15-cv-00019-CCB)
Submitted: April 19, 2016 Decided: April 22, 2016
Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Judy Kay Miskell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Judy Kay Miskell appeals the district court’s order returning correspondence that Miskell attempted to file in her closed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Miskell v. Chase, No. 1:15−cv−00019-CCB (D. Md. Jan. 12, 2016). 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.