Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 F.3d 128

Docket No. 94-6534.

Brown v. Smith

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted June 23, 1994. Decided July 26, 1994.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Truong Dinh Hung v. United States · Evans v. Croom · Daniel T. Brashear v. William D. Schaeffer Executive Director of the Governor's Office of Justice Assistance Bishop L. Robinson Paul J. Davis Richard A. Lanham Director, Public Justice Center Commutation Project Director, House of Ruth, Incorporated of Baltimore, Maryland Joseph J. Curran, Daniel T. Brashear v. William D. Schaeffer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Maryland and His Heirs or Successors Joseph J. Curran, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Attorney General for the State of Maryland and His Heirs or Successors

Opinion by Per Curiam ·

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-93-1435-AM)

Jay B. Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss this appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

/30/f3d/128 · .json · Public domain