Buckingham v. United States

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1103 JAMES E. BUCKINGHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 99-965-S) Submitted: June 13, 2000 Decided: June 30, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Lee Belsky, Kimberly Ann Alley, SCHLACHMAN, BELSKY & WEINER, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland; Daniel S. Katz, TYDINGS & ROSENBERG, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Lynne A. Battaglia, United States Attorney, Larry D. Adams, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James E. Buckingham appeals the district court’s grant of sum- mary judgment to the United States and dismissal of his complaint brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin- ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Buckingham v. United States, No. CA-99-965-S (D. Md. Jan. 3, 2000). We dispense with oral argu- ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2