Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Davis v. Runyon, 97-2518 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-2518 Visitors: 19
Filed: Feb. 24, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2518 MICHAEL B. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARVIN RUNYON, Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Lynchburg. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-40-L) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: February 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by un
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2518 MICHAEL B. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARVIN RUNYON, Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Lynchburg. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-40-L) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: February 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael B. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Lucille Covington, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Washington, D.C.; Alonzo Harrison Long, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 Appel- lee's motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court and deny Appellant's motion to authorize a transcript at the government's expense. Davis v. Runyon, No. CA-96-40-L (W.D. Va. Oct. 6, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions 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