Filed: Sep. 17, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1384 STEWART B. ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-302-A) Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1384 STEWART B. ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-302-A) Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by u..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1384 STEWART B. ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-302-A) Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stewart B. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(d) (1988), his civil action seeking to enjoin the Internal Revenue Service from collecting unpaid taxes, penalties and interest. We have reviewed the record and the dis- trict court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Allen v. Commission- er, No. CA-96-302-A (E.D. Va. Mar. 8, 1996). 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
