Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

94-7264 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-7264 Visitors: 15
Filed: Apr. 03, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 51 F.3d 270 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Robert Walter WOLTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lois MAY, a/k/a Louise May, a/k/a Louise/Lisa May; Gary Steven May, a/k/a Michael May; Nicholus Reys, a/k/a Ray Rayes, a/k/a Nick; Vivian Francis Wessel; Alfred Lewis Reed; John Doe, Esq
More

51 F.3d 270

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Robert Walter WOLTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Lois MAY, a/k/a Louise May, a/k/a Louise/Lisa May; Gary
Steven May, a/k/a Michael May; Nicholus Reys, a/k/a Ray
Rayes, a/k/a Nick; Vivian Francis Wessel; Alfred Lewis
Reed; John Doe, Esquire; Pat Feeney, Esquire; Edward
Bradley, Esquire; Jane Hanley, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-7264.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 15, 1995.
Decided: April 3, 1995.

Robert Walter Woltz, Appellant Pro Se.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

The notice of appeal in this case was received in the district court shortly after expiration of the appeal period. Under Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), the notice is considered filed as of the date Appellant delivered it to prison officials for forwarding to the court. The record does not reveal when Appellant delivered the notice of appeal for mailing to the court. Accordingly, we remand the case for the district court to obtain this information from the parties and determine the timeliness of the filing under Houston v. Lack. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this Court for further consideration.

2

REMANDED.

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