Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Kissi v. US Small Business, 99-2319 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-2319 Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 28, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2319 DAVID ADOFO KISSI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. No. 99-2320 DAVID ADOFO KISSI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus C. LAWRENCE WISER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-99-1228-WMN, CA-99-1811-WMN) Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 200
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2319 DAVID ADOFO KISSI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. No. 99-2320 DAVID ADOFO KISSI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus C. LAWRENCE WISER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-99-1228-WMN, CA-99-1811-WMN) Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Adofo Kissi, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David Kissi appeals the district court’s orders granting the U.S. Small Business Administration’s motion to dismiss and denying Kissi’s motion to reconsider dismissal of his civil action against C. Lawrence Wiser. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we af- firm on the reasoning of the district court and deny Kissi’s motion to appoint counsel. See Kissi v. U.S. Small Bus. Admin., Nos. CA- 99-1228-WMN; CA-99-1811-WMN (D. Md. Sept. 14, 1999). 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 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer