Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Raymond J. BLY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY, as an agency and instrumentality of the State of Maryland; Wayne A. Robey, Individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of the Circuit Court for Howard County, MD; Honorable Lenore Gelfman, individually and in her official capacity as Administrative Judge of the Circuit Court for Howard County, MD; J. Does, One or more individuals sued in his or her or their individual capacities, and in his or her or their respective capacities as state agents or actors directed or knowingly permitted to perpetrate acts and/or omissions knowingly and intentionally violative, Defendants - Appellees.
Raymond J. Bly filed a civil action in the district court alleging that the Defendants improperly denied access to court records relating to his 1987 Maryland criminal convictions. Bly appeals (1) the district court's order granting in part the Defendants’ motion to dismiss; (2) the magistrate judge's order * granting summary judgment to the Defendants on Bly's First Amendment right of access claim; and (3) the magistrate judge's order denying Bly's Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion and his motion for sanctions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the lower court. Bly v. Cir. Ct. for Howard Cnty., Md., No. 1:18-cv-01333-JMC (D. Md. June 26, 2019, Oct. 9, 2019, & Dec. 4, 2019). 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2018).
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Response sent, thank you
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.
Docket No: No. 19-2457
Decided: May 26, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)