FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10762695
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Eric Rich v. Daniel Hersl

No. 10762695 · Decided December 19, 2025
No. 10762695 · Fourth Circuit · 2025 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided
December 19, 2025
Citation
No. 10762695
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6775 Doc: 83 Filed: 12/19/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-6775 ERIC RICH, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. OFFICER DANIEL HERSL, Individually and as a police officer for Baltimore City Police Dept., Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Albert David Copperthite, Magistrate Judge. (1:20-cv-00488-ADC) Argued: December 9, 2025 Decided: December 19, 2025 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: Christopher S. Edwards, WARD & SMITH, P.A., Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. James Arba Henry Corley, CITY OF BALTIMORE LAW DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Ebony M. Thompson, City Solicitor, Michael Redmond, Director, Appellate Practice, CITY OF BALTIMORE LAW DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6775 Doc: 83 Filed: 12/19/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Plaintiff Eric Deandre Rich appeals from an adverse judgment of July 2023, entered in the District of Maryland in favor of defendant Daniel Hersl, a former officer with the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force. Specifically, the district court resolved to award summary judgment to Hersl on Rich’s Fourth Amendment claims for illegal arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Rich v. Hersl, No. 1:20-cv-00488 (D. Md. July 20, 2023), ECF Nos. 107 & 108. We review an award of summary judgment de novo. See T.H.E. Ins. Co. v. Davis, 54 F.4th 805, 818 (4th Cir. 2022); Robinson v. Clipse, 602 F.3d 605, 607 (4th Cir. 2010). Having carefully assessed the record — as well as the various appellate submissions of the parties and the argument presented in Richmond — we discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we are content to affirm the judgment of the district court. AFFIRMED 2
Plain English Summary
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6775 Doc: 83 Filed: 12/19/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6775 Doc: 83 Filed: 12/19/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Eric Rich v. Daniel Hersl in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 19, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10762695 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →