Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

48 F.3d 1217

Docket No. 94-7041.

Patch v. United States US V

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Jan. 19, 1995. Decided Feb. 16, 1995.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1995-02-16

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently March 2009

1 federal appellate ·

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)

Relies on Truong Dinh Hung v. United States · Evans v. Croom · In Re: Harrison A. Stephens

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1995-02-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William L. Patch, Appellant Pro Se.

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

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his Federal Tort Claims Act* complaint. The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge who assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982). The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. The district court accepted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the 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

/48/f3d/1217 · .json · Public domain