Filed: Mar. 15, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2208 L. RUTHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LAKE DEL RAY APARTMENTS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-01-1032-A) Submitted: February 22, 2002 Decided: March 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2208 L. RUTHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LAKE DEL RAY APARTMENTS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-01-1032-A) Submitted: February 22, 2002 Decided: March 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard J..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-2208
L. RUTHER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LAKE DEL RAY APARTMENTS,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge.
(CA-01-1032-A)
Submitted: February 22, 2002 Decided: March 15, 2002
Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard Joseph DiMuro, DIMURO,
GINSBERG, & LIEBERMAN, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
L. Ruther appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his
civil action and motion to reconsider. The record does not contain
a transcript of the hearing conducted on September 7, 2001, at
which the district court gave its reasons for dismissing the
action. Ruther has the burden of including in the record on appeal
a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues
raised on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. Local R. 10(c).
Appellants proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis are entitled to
transcripts at government expense only in certain circumstances.
28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994). By failing to produce a transcript or
to qualify for the production of a transcript at government ex-
pense, Ruther has waived review of the issues on appeal which de-
pend upon the transcript to show error. Keller v. Prince George’s
Co.,
827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). We therefore affirm
the district court’s orders. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2