Jerome SEGAL; Peter Roemer; Michael Hodge, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS; Linda Lamone, State Administrator, Defendants - Appellees.
Decided: October 11, 2018
Before WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Jerome Segal, Peter Roemer, Michael Hodge, Appellants Pro Se. Julia Doyle Bernhardt, Andrea William Trento, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Jerome Segal, Peter Roemer, and Michael Hodge appeal the district court's order denying their motion for a preliminary injunction, in which they sought to have Segal placed on the ballot in Maryland's upcoming general election. We review the denial of a preliminary injunction for an abuse of discretion. Dewhurst v. Century Aluminum Co., 649 F.3d 287, 290 (4th Cir. 2011). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. See S.C. Green Party v. S.C. State Election Comm'n, 612 F.3d 752, 756-60 (4th Cir. 2010) (rejecting First Amendment challenge to South Carolina's sore-loser statute); Backus v. Spears, 677 F.2d 397, 399-400 (4th Cir. 1982) (same). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. Segal v. Md. State Bd. of Elections, No. 1:18-cv-02731-GJH (D. Md. Sept. 18, 2018). 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.