Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Toplanchik v. Defense Finance, 02-1898 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-1898 Visitors: 48
Filed: Oct. 16, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1898 GEORGE D. TOPLANCHIK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee, and CHARLES A. WILSON, Defendant. No. 02-1899 GEORGE D. TOPLANCHIK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee, and CHARLES A. WILSON, Defendant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Distr
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1898 GEORGE D. TOPLANCHIK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee, and CHARLES A. WILSON, Defendant. No. 02-1899 GEORGE D. TOPLANCHIK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee, and CHARLES A. WILSON, Defendant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-01- 2881-MJG) Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 16, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George D. Toplanchik, Appellant Pro Se. Larry David Adams, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, George D. Toplanchik appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on his civil action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Toplanchik v. Def. Fin. & Accounting Serv., No. CA-01-2881-MJG (D. Md. July 31, 2002). 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 3
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