Reuter v. Washington County Supervisors, No. 06-1981 (4th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1981 JOSE F. REUTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WASHINGTON COUNTY SUPERVISORS; GREGORY I.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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. the record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed 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 Theodoni, M.D., as a party to the appeal. to dismiss Paul 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 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.