Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Payne v. West Virginia Public, 03-2080 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-2080 Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 25, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2080 VIRGIL L. PAYNE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WEST VIRGINIA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION; PAGE- KINCAID PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT, a public utility; KENNETH B. FOX, Chairman; JOHN P. DAVID, Secretary; JAMES A. KINCAID, JR., Treasurer; BARTON JACKSON, JR., Plant Manager/Operator; DOROTHY JEFFERS, Bookkeeper, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at C
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2080 VIRGIL L. PAYNE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WEST VIRGINIA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION; PAGE- KINCAID PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT, a public utility; KENNETH B. FOX, Chairman; JOHN P. DAVID, Secretary; JAMES A. KINCAID, JR., Treasurer; BARTON JACKSON, JR., Plant Manager/Operator; DOROTHY JEFFERS, Bookkeeper, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-6-2) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: November 25, 2003 Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Virgil L. Payne, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Kent Phillips, Robert L. Bailey, II, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, Charleston, West Virginia; Philip J. Tissue, Oak Hill, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Virgil L. Payne appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Payne’s motion for general relief and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Payne v. West Virginia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, No. CA-03-6-2 (S.D.W. Va. July 29, 2003). 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