Filed: May 13, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2722 G. S. HASSAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AT&T CORPORATION; PHILLIS S. PARSON; GEORGE BEACON; WILLIAM SNEIRSON; MADELINE C. PETTERS; SNYDER COMMUNICATION L.P.; VINCENT CANDIDA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-97-1433-A) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 13, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NI
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2722 G. S. HASSAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AT&T CORPORATION; PHILLIS S. PARSON; GEORGE BEACON; WILLIAM SNEIRSON; MADELINE C. PETTERS; SNYDER COMMUNICATION L.P.; VINCENT CANDIDA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-97-1433-A) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 13, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIE..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2722 G. S. HASSAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AT&T CORPORATION; PHILLIS S. PARSON; GEORGE BEACON; WILLIAM SNEIRSON; MADELINE C. PETTERS; SNYDER COMMUNICATION L.P.; VINCENT CANDIDA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-97-1433-A) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 13, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. G. S. Hassan, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Land Lewis, SEYFARTH, SHAW, FAIRWEATHER & GERALDSON, Washington, D.C.; Philip John Harvey, SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his request to stay proceedings, denying his request for sanctions on opposing counsel, and dismissing without prejudice his complaint alleging violations of his civil and constitutional rights. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hassan v. AT&T Corp., No. CA-97-1433-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 19, 1997). 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