Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Martin v. Suter, 96-6256 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6256 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jul. 31, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6256 HENRY W. MARTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM K. SUTER, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States; TROY D. CAHILL, Assis- tant Clerk of Court; CYNTHIA RAPP, Assistant Clerk of Court; BERT M. MONTAGUE, Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; CHERYL M. WILLIAMSON, Deputy Clerk, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Ca
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6256 HENRY W. MARTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM K. SUTER, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States; TROY D. CAHILL, Assis- tant Clerk of Court; CYNTHIA RAPP, Assistant Clerk of Court; BERT M. MONTAGUE, Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; CHERYL M. WILLIAMSON, Deputy Clerk, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2341-6-OAK) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 31, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry W. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying re- lief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Martin v. Suter, No. CA-95-2341-6-OAK (D.S.C. Dec. 14, 1995). 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
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