Filed: Feb. 25, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7721 WILLIAM F. ALLEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL FRAZIER, Property Owner; ANN COBERLY, Renter, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-161) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7721 WILLIAM F. ALLEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL FRAZIER, Property Owner; ANN COBERLY, Renter, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-161) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7721 WILLIAM F. ALLEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL FRAZIER, Property Owner; ANN COBERLY, Renter, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-161) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. Allen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Earl Frazier, Ann Coberly, Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William F. Allen, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (West Supp. 1998). 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 Allen v. Frazier, No. CA-98- 161 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 17, 1998). 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
