USCA1 Opinion
November 7, 1995
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-1601
FRANCOIS O. SEVIGNY AND ALBERTA M. SEVIGNY,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
STATE OF MAINE,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
No. 95-1640
FRANCOIS O. SEVIGNY AND ALBERTA M. SEVIGNY,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
STATE OF MAINE, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Cyr, Boudin and Lynch,
Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
Francois O. Sevigny and Alberta M. Sevigny on briefs pro se.
___________________ __________________
Andrew Ketterer, Attorney General, and Leanne Robbin, Assistant
_______________ ______________
Attorney General, on brief for state appellees.
William H. Dale and Jensen Baird Gardner & Henry, on brief for
________________ ______________________________
Town of Sanford appellees.
Sally J. Daggett and Jensen Baird Gardner & Henry, on brief for
_________________ _____________________________
appellees, Jensen Baird Gardner & Henry, William H. Dale, James N.
Katsiaficas and Sally J. Daggett.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record on appeal and
__________
the briefs filed by the parties in these related appeals. We
find neither error of law nor abuse of discretion in the
district court's disposition of these matters. We,
therefore, affirm the dismissals of each complaint,
essentially for the reasons stated in the district court
order of May 15, 1995 and the judgment of May 25, 1995.
The appellants' request that we reconsider our decision
submitting these appeals on briefs without oral argument is
denied.
_______
The order of May 15, 1995, in district court docket #95-
MC-46 and the judgment of May 25, 1995, in district court
docket #95-cv-2 are affirmed.
_________
-3-
