From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Childs v. Schlitz

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 22, 1977
556 F.2d 1178 (4th Cir. 1977)

Summary

licensing of professional engineer

Summary of this case from Phillips v. Marsh

Opinion

No. 76-2417.

Argued April 7, 1977.

Decided June 22, 1977.

Paul F. Strain, Baltimore, Md. (Arnold M. Weiner and J. Frederick Motz, Baltimore, Md., on brief) for appellants.

Robert J. Aumiller, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore, Md. (Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen. Jon F. Oster, Deputy Atty. Gen. of Md., Baltimore, Md., on brief) for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

Before WINTER, BUTZNER and HALL, Circuit Judges.


Given immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 and required to testify in a criminal case, Lester Matz and Jerome B. Wolff, both professional engineers, asserted in the district court that the Maryland Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Professional Land Surveyors could not properly consider such testimony in determining whether to revoke their licenses to practice their profession. To do so, they assert, would violate their rights under the fifth amendment and the protection afforded by the federal immunity statute.

In a well reasoned opinion, the district court correctly rejected plaintiffs' contentions. Childs v. McCord, 420 F. Supp. 428 (D.Md. 1976). We adopt the opinion as our own and affirm the judgment.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Childs v. Schlitz

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 22, 1977
556 F.2d 1178 (4th Cir. 1977)

licensing of professional engineer

Summary of this case from Phillips v. Marsh
Case details for

Childs v. Schlitz

Case Details

Full title:JOHN C. CHILDS ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, LESTER MATZ AND JEROME B. WOLFF…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jun 22, 1977

Citations

556 F.2d 1178 (4th Cir. 1977)

Citing Cases

Agnew v. State

Their certificates to practice their profession could have been suspended, revoked, or not renewed by the…

U.S. v. Prop. at 850 S. Maple

Id. at 17. This holding is consistent with the idea that "a prosecutor may not circumvent a person's…