Cephas J. Sweet v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 872 F.2d 419 (4th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Cephas J. Sweet v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 872 F.2d 419 (4th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“he duty to protect patrons against conduct of third parties does not exceed the general duty of care and duty to warn of hidden dangers.”
45 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Dinardo v. It's My Amphitheater, Inc. (mdd, 2022-03-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Dinardo v. It's My Amphitheater, Inc.
D. Maryland · 2022 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
he duty to protect patrons against conduct of third parties does not exceed the general duty of care and duty to warn of hidden dangers.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Dinardo v. It's My Amphitheater, Inc.
D. Maryland · 2022 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
he duty to protect patrons against conduct of third parties does not exceed the general duty of care and duty to warn of hidden dangers.
cited Cited "see" Gay v. United States
D. Maryland · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tucker v. RFC National Management Co., 689 F.Supp. 560, 561 (D.Md.1988), aff'd table, 872 F.2d 419 (4th Cir.1989).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bias v. IPC Intern. Corp.
4th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
Co. v. Manor Inn of Bethesda, Inc., 335 Md. 135, 150 , 642 A.2d 219, 226 (1994) (quoting Ashburn v. Anne Arundel County, 306 Md. 617, 628 , 510 A.2d 1078, 1083 (1986)); see also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 315 (1965). 2 In Tucker v. KFC National Management Co., 689 F.Supp. 560, 562 (D.Md.1988), aff'd, 872 F.2d 419 (4th Cir.1989), the court held that under Maryland law, a storekeeper and its customer do not enjoy the "special relationship" necessary to implicate a higher duty of care.
Cephas J. Sweet
v.
Department of Health and Human Services
88-2913.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Apr 5, 1989.
872 F.2d 419
Unpublished
1 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 68%
Citer courts: D. Maryland (2)

872 F.2d 419
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.
Cephas J. SWEET, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 88-2913.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 1989.
Decided March 14, 1989.
Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied April 5, 1989.

Cephas J. Sweet, appellant pro se.

Stephen Matthew Schenning, Office of the United States Attorney, Richard M. Friedman, United States Department of Health & Human Services, for appellee.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, SPROUSE, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Cephas J. Sweet appeals from the district court's decision dismissing his claim in part and denying relief in part based on his claims of employment discrimination in his termination from employment at the Department of Health and Human Services. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Sweet v. Department of Health and Human Services, C/A No. 86-3722 (D.Md. Aug. 5, 1988). We deny Sweet's motion for appointment of counsel and grant appellee's motion to strike Sweet's affidavit and his attorney's certificate as irrelevant. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

2

AFFIRMED.