Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States of America Maxcy Garrett, Revenue Officer v. Eric C. Stallings, 90-1718 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-1718 Visitors: 53
Filed: May 17, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 905 F.2d 1532 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. UNITED STATES of America; Maxcy Garrett, Revenue Officer, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Eric C. STALLINGS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-1718. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted May 7, 1990
More

905 F.2d 1532
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America; Maxcy Garrett, Revenue Officer,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Eric C. STALLINGS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-1718.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 7, 1990.
Decided May 17, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Franklin T. Dupree, Jr., Senior District Judge. (C/A No. 89-125-7-CIV)

Eric C. Stallings, appellant pro se.

Richard Bruce Conely, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, N.C., for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Eric C. Stallings appeals from the district court's order finding him in contempt of court. 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. United States v. Stallings, C/A No. 89-125-7-CIV (E.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 1990). 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