91 F. 3d 131 - McNamara v. P Wasserman
91 F3d 131 McNamara v. P Wasserman
91 F.3d 131
Gary N. MCNAMARA, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Martin P. WASSERMAN, Individually and in his capacity as
Secretary for the Maryland Department of Health & Mental
Hygiene; Mary K. Noren, Individually and in her capacity as
Superintendent for the Eastern Shore Hospital Center; David
Williamson, Doctor, Individually and in his capacity as
Director of Forensic Psychiatry for the Eastern Shore
Hospital Center; Joel J. Todd, in his official and
administrative capacities as State's Attorney for Worcester
County, Maryland; All known and unknown persons as set
forth in the joinder of the complaint; Richard Eckardt,
Social Worker Eastern Shore Hospital Center; Burton
Anderson, Public Defender Service; Paul L. Stone, Rights
Advisor Eastern Shore Hospital Center; Cindy Basil, Charge
Nurse, Eastern Shore Hospital Center; Walter Gumby,
Assistant Public Defender Service, Raul Lopez, Doctor,
Psychiatrist, Eastern Shore Hospital Center; Russell P.
Smith, Jr., Doctor, Dentist, Eastern Shore Hospital Center;
Martin Brandes, Doctor, Psychiatrist, Eastern Shore Hospital
Center; Anita Earp Robinson, Honorable, Administrative Law
Judge, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 96-6292.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 23, 1996.
Decided: July 31, 1996.
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-95-2907-AMD)
Gary N. McNamara, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Baltimore, MD; Susan Renee Steinberg, MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & MENTAL HYGIENE, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.
D.Md.
AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Advertisement
Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action. All but four of Appellants' claims were dismissed without prejudice. Because such dismissals are generally not appealable, we dismiss the appeal regarding these claims. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993).
Three of Appellant's remaining claims were dismissed as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1988), and Appellant's last claim was dismissed after summary judgment was granted to the only remaining Defendant. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of the remaining claims on the reasoning of the district court. McNamara v. Wasserman, No. CA-95-2907-AMD (D. Md. Oct. 24, 1995, & Feb. 1, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART