Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Andrew Maurice Maryland v. Keith Davis Nurse Epperson Rufus Fleming Sergeant Whitehead, 94-6918 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6918 Visitors: 19
Filed: Feb. 14, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 47 F.3d 1165 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Andrew Maurice MARYLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Keith DAVIS; Nurse Epperson; Rufus Fleming; Sergeant Whitehead, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-6918. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 19, 1995. Decided F
More

47 F.3d 1165

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Andrew Maurice MARYLAND, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Keith DAVIS; Nurse Epperson; Rufus Fleming; Sergeant
Whitehead, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 94-6918.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 19, 1995.
Decided Feb. 14, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-340)

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Andrew Maurice Maryland, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, 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.

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