George W. Gantt, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Bernard Smith, Acting Warden, Maryland Penitentiary Andm.c.a.c.; Richard A. Lanham; Sewall Smith; Major Purnell;major Councel; Lieutenant Diay; Sergeant Brown; Sergeantgardner; Corporal Senson; Hicks; Lee; Peay; Vivianwillis, Defendants-appellee, 972 F.2d 339 (4th Cir. 1992)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Joseph C. Howard, District Judge. (CA-91-1570, CA-91-2599)
George W. Gantt, Appellant Pro Se.
John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Glenn William Bell, Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
D.M.d.
Affirmed.
Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
George W. Gantt appeals from the district court's order dismissing his civil rights complaints under the doctrine of res judicata. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit.1 Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.2 Gantt v. Smith, Nos. CA-91-1570, CA-91-2599 (D. Md. Mar. 20, 1992). 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
We deny Gantt's motions for appointment of counsel, to consolidate this case with another pending case in the Court of Appeals, for a continuance of these proceedings, and for a Temporary Restraining Order
Although Gantt's claims that prison officials read his legal documents, failed to provide adequate medical care, and misappropriated his prison account funds raise new claims, we find that they fail to state constitutional violations. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533-34 (1984); White v. White, 886 F.2d 721 (4th Cir. 1989); Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1088 (1986)
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.
