Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Larry Ray Johnson v. M.E. Riddle, 90-6593 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6593 Visitors: 20
Filed: Apr. 26, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 931 F.2d 54 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Larry Ray JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M.E. RIDDLE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 90-6593. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted April 8, 1991. Decided April 26, 1991. Appeal from the Unite
More

931 F.2d 54
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Larry Ray JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
M.E. RIDDLE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 90-6593.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 8, 1991.
Decided April 26, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-90-665-AM)

Larry Ray Johnson, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Larry Ray Johnson appeals from the district court's order dismissing his complaint under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 for failure to make a showing of good cause or make payment of a partial filing fee as required by a previous order of the district court. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. Riddle, CA-90-665-AM (E.D. Va. May 14, 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

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