Warren Giddings v. Corizon

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Warren Giddings v. Corizon

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6300 Doc: 16 Filed: 02/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6300

WARREN MATTHEW GIDDINGS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CORIZON; MR. RORHER; MCTC NURSE; CENTURION BEHAVIORAL HEALTH STAFF,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (1:21-cv-03166-LKG)

Submitted: January 31, 2024 Decided: February 23, 2024

Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, and RICHARDSON and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Warren Matthew Giddings, Appellant Pro Se. Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, MARKS, O’NEILL, O’BRIEN, DOHERTY & KELLY, P.C., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee Corizon.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6300 Doc: 16 Filed: 02/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Warren Matthew Giddings appeals the district court’s order granting summary

judgment to Corizon on his claims raised pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

and dismissing the

remaining Defendants. On appeal, Corizon has filed a suggestion of bankruptcy and notice

of automatic stay informing this court that it commenced Chapter 11 bankruptcy

proceedings in February 2023. The automatic stay precludes us from reviewing the district

court’s disposition of Giddings’ claims against Corizon. As to the court’s disposition of

Giddings’ claims against the remaining Defendants, we have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Giddings’ motion to proceed under the Prison

Litigation Reform Act,

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(b), and affirm the district court’s order as to all

defendants except Corizon. Giddings v. Corizon, No. 1:21-cv-03166-LKG (D. Md. Jan.

25, 2023). 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 IN PART

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished