Filed: Sep. 09, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6998 PAUL NAGY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL ARTHUR SCHAEFER, DR.; DONNA J. TOMAWSKI; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-02-230-5-H) Submitted: August 20, 2002 Decided: September 9, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6998 PAUL NAGY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL ARTHUR SCHAEFER, DR.; DONNA J. TOMAWSKI; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-02-230-5-H) Submitted: August 20, 2002 Decided: September 9, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublish..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6998
PAUL NAGY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MICHAEL ARTHUR SCHAEFER, DR.; DONNA J.
TOMAWSKI; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-02-230-5-H)
Submitted: August 20, 2002 Decided: September 9, 2002
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul Nagy, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Paul Nagy appeals the district court’s order dismissing,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e) (West Supp. 2002) this action
filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act and Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971). We
have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find
that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal
on the reasoning of the district court. See Nagy v. Schaefer, No.
CA-02-230-5-H (E.D.N.C. June 4, 2002). 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.
DISMISSED
2