Warren Giddings v. Montgomery County, Maryland, No. 21-7476 (4th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-7476 WARREN MATTHEW GIDDINGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; CHARLES COUNTY PROBATION OFFICER 1; CHARLES COUNTY PROBATION OFFICER 2; MONTGOMERY COUNTY HEAD/LEAD PROSECUTOR; HANNAH GLEASON, Montgomery County Deputy District Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:21-cv-01958-GLR) Submitted: May 24, 2022 Decided: May 26, 2022 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Warren Matthew Giddings, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Warren Matthew Giddings appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Giddings v. Montgomery Cnty., No. 1:21-cv-01958-GLR (D. Md. Sept. 22, 2021). 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 We conclude that the district court’s order dismissing the complaint without prejudice is an appealable final order. See Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 615 (4th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 1376 (2021). * 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.