Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jack Widener v. Mr. Vinyard, Attorney at Law, Abingdon, Virginia Social Security Department, 90-6794 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6794 Visitors: 8
Filed: May 18, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 905 F.2d 1533 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jack WIDENER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. VINYARD, Attorney at Law, Abingdon, Virginia; Social Security Department, Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-6794. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submit
More

905 F.2d 1533
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jack WIDENER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Mr. VINYARD, Attorney at Law, Abingdon, Virginia; Social
Security Department, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6794.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 7, 1990.
Decided May 18, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (C/A No. 90-117-A-R)

Jack Widener, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

1

Jack Widener appeals the district court's dismissal of this 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action for failure to pay the assessed filing fee. Finding that the district court complied with the procedures approved in Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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

DISMISSED.

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