Wayne Resper v. Derek Baer, No. 13-6703 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6703 WAYNE RESPER, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DEREK A. BAER, Officer, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:13-cv-00024-PJM) Submitted: September 20, 2013 Decided: September 30, 2013 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wayne Resper, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wayne Resper appeals the district court s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006) as barred by the statute of limitations. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. See Resper v. Baer, No. 8:13-cv-00024-PJM (D. Md. Jan. 15 & Mar. 26, 2013). In addition, we note that in Maryland, following the voluntary dismissal of a civil action without prejudice, a second complaint based upon the same facts still must be filed within the applicable limitations period. Sheng Bi v. Gibson, 45 A.3d 305, 309 (Md. App. 2012). * dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * Federal courts must apply the forum state s rules for tolling the statute of limitations. Bd. of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1980). 2

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.