History
  • No items yet
midpage
Starsha Sewell v. John Howard, Sr.
16-1758
| 4th Cir. | Nov 28, 2016
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Starsha Sewell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

Starsha Sewell appeals the district court’s orders returning documents to Sewell on the ground that the case is closed. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sewell v. Howard, No. 8:12-cv-02736-JFM (D. Md. June 14 & 29, 2016). 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

2

Case Details

Case Name: Starsha Sewell v. John Howard, Sr.
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Nov 28, 2016
Docket Number: 16-1758
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.