Filed: Dec. 18, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2249 W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff - Appellant, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff, versus JOHN A. BOGGS; THE FLORIDA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-978-A) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 18, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Ci
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2249 W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff - Appellant, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff, versus JOHN A. BOGGS; THE FLORIDA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-978-A) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 18, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Cir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2249 W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff - Appellant, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL W. A. MACGUIRE, Plaintiff, versus JOHN A. BOGGS; THE FLORIDA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-978-A) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 18, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. W. A. MacGuire, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint, and denying Appellant's motion for leave to amend his complaint. We have reviewed the rec- ord and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. MacGuire v. Boggs, No. CA-96-978-A (E.D. Va. July 19 & Aug. 8, 1996). 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. AFFIRMED 2
