Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Perry v. IRS, 07-1018 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-1018 Visitors: 24
Filed: Jul. 26, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1018 CEDRIC R. PERRY, doing business as Perry, Anthony & Sosna, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; DEPARTMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TREASURY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-cv-00843-D) Submitted: June 13, 2007 Decided: July 26, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MICH
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1018 CEDRIC R. PERRY, doing business as Perry, Anthony & Sosna, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; DEPARTMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TREASURY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-cv-00843-D) Submitted: June 13, 2007 Decided: July 26, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cedric R. Perry, Appellant Pro Se. Richard L. Parker, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cedric R. Perry, d/b/a Perry, Anthony & Sosna, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint without prejudice for failure to properly serve the defendant government agencies as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). We have reviewed the briefs and the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Perry v. IRS, No. 5:05-cv-00843-D (E.D.N.C. Oct. 31, 2006). 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 -
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