Patrick Muhammad v. Maryland Court of Appeals, No. 08-1399 (4th Cir. 2008)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1399 PATRICK J. MUHAMMAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS; ROBERT M. BELL; IRMA S. RAKER; ALAN M. WILNER; DALE R. CATHELL; GLENN T. HARRELL, JR.; LYNNE ANN BATTAGLIA; CLAYTON GREENE, JR., all to be located at Robert C. Murphy Court of Appeals Building, 361 Rowe Boulevard Annapolis, MD 21401; STATE OF MARYLAND; BOB ERHLICH, Governor; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL; GARY W. KUC; MELVIN HIRSHMAN; MARIANNE LEE; ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND; JOHN DOE 3; JOHN DOE NEWSPAPER; JANE DOE NUMBER 2; MARVIN J. GARBIS, in his individual and professional capacities; CATHERINE C. BLAKE, in her individual and professional capacities; JANE DOE NEWSPAPER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:06-cv-03444-CCB) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 19, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Patrick J. Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se. William Ferris Brockman, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Patrick J. Muhammad appeals the district court s orders dismissing his civil rights complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and denying reconsideration of that order. We have error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. reviewed the record and find no reversible See Muhammad v. Md. Ct. of Appeals, No. 1:06- cv-03444-CCB (D. Md. Feb. 11 & Mar. 6, 2008). We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before the court are 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.