Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

David F. Mosteller v. Susan I. Smith, 91-6299 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-6299 Visitors: 40
Filed: Jul. 16, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 937 F.2d 603 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. David F. MOSTELLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Susan I. SMITH, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-6299. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted June 12, 1991. Decided July 16, 1991. Appeal from the U
More

937 F.2d 603
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
David F. MOSTELLER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Susan I. SMITH, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-6299.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 12, 1991.
Decided July 16, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, District Judge. (CA-90-550)

David F. Mosteller, appellant pro se.

Henry Edward Hudson, United States Attorney, Alexandria, Va., Debra Jean Prillaman, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, PHILLIPS and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

David F. Mosteller appeals from the district court's order denying relief in his action filed under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Mosteller v. Smith, CA-90-550 (E.D.Va. Mar. 1, 1991). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

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