Filed: Aug. 14, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1487 DIANA M. CAMPITELLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LISA DUERLING; DEBBIE NIGRIN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 423-L) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 14, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Diana M. Campitelli, Appellant Pr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1487 DIANA M. CAMPITELLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LISA DUERLING; DEBBIE NIGRIN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 423-L) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 14, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Diana M. Campitelli, Appellant Pro..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1487 DIANA M. CAMPITELLI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LISA DUERLING; DEBBIE NIGRIN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-01- 423-L) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 14, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Diana M. Campitelli, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Diana M. Campitelli appeals the district court's order denying her motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Campitelli v. Duerling, No. CA-01-423-L (D. Md. Mar. 21, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
