Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

983 F.2d 1055

Docket No. 92-7132.

Burnley v. Click

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted: November 30, 1992 Decided: December 29, 1992

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1992-12-29

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

Relies on In Re: Albert Russell Clay, Jr.

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1992-12-29

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-92-442-R)

John Rodgers Burnley, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

Affirmed.

Before WILKINS and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

¶1

John Rodgers Burnley appeals the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint because Burnley failed to comply with an earlier order to amend the pleading in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the district court. Burnley v. Click, No. CA-92-442-R (E.D. Va. Oct. 23, 1992).* 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

*

We also deny Burnley's motion for appointment of counsel

/983/f2d/1055 · .json · Public domain