Filed: Jan. 21, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2506 MYRON BOGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHEASTERN TIDEWATER OPPORTUNITY PROJECT, a/k/a The Stop Organization, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-766-2) Submitted: December 26, 1996 Decided: January 21, 1997 Before HALL, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2506 MYRON BOGGS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHEASTERN TIDEWATER OPPORTUNITY PROJECT, a/k/a The Stop Organization, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-766-2) Submitted: December 26, 1996 Decided: January 21, 1997 Before HALL, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublish..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-2506
MYRON BOGGS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SOUTHEASTERN TIDEWATER OPPORTUNITY PROJECT,
a/k/a The Stop Organization,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-96-766-2)
Submitted: December 26, 1996 Decided: January 21, 1997
Before HALL, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Myron Boggs, Appellant Pro Se. James A. Gorry, III, Richard William
Zahn, Jr., TAYLOR & WALKER, P.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary
judgment to Defendant in this action alleging claims under 42
U.S.C. ยง 1985 (1994), and alleging violations of First Amendment
and privacy rights under the United States Constitution. We have
reviewed the record and conclude that this action is barred by res
judicata. See Keith v. Aldridge,
900 F.2d 736, 739 (4th Cir. 1990).
Accordingly, we affirm the ruling of the district court. Boggs v.
Southeastern Tidewater Opportunity Project, No. CA-96-766-2 (E.D.
Va. Sept. 25, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2