Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Vincent Lee Foreman, Sr. v. Edward Murray, James Smith, James Snodgrass, H.E. Norman, 840 F.2d 10, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views1 page
    Vincent Foreman brought a Section 1983 action that was dismissed by the district court for failure to pay the filing fee. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice, finding that the district court followed the proper procedures for indigent plaintiffs and did not abuse its discretion. The Fourth Circuit decided the issues without oral argument because they had been recently decided in other cases.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1988-02-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 840 F.2d 10 Docket: 87-7739

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Vincent Foreman brought a Section 1983 action that was dismissed by the district court for failure to pay the filing fee. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice, finding that the district court followed the proper procedures for indigent plaintiffs and did not abuse its discretion. The Fourth Circuit decided the issues without oral argument because they had been recently decided in other cases.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views1 page

    Vincent Lee Foreman, Sr. v. Edward Murray, James Smith, James Snodgrass, H.E. Norman, 840 F.2d 10, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Vincent Foreman brought a Section 1983 action that was dismissed by the district court for failure to pay the filing fee. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice, finding that the district court followed the proper procedures for indigent plaintiffs and did not abuse its discretion. The Fourth Circuit decided the issues without oral argument because they had been recently decided in other cases.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    840 F.

    2d 10
    Unpublished Disposition

    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    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing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.
    Vincent Lee FOREMAN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Edward MURRAY, James Smith, James Snodgrass, H.E.
    Norman,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 87-7739.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Dec. 28, 1987.
    Decided Feb. 17, 1988.

    Vincent Lee Foreman, Sr., appellant pro se.


    Before WIDENER, SPROUSE, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Vincent Foreman appeals the district court's dismissal of this 42 U.S.C. Sec.
    1983 action for failure to pay the assessed filing fee. Finding that the district
    court properly complied with the procedures approved in Evans v. Croom, 650
    F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and did not abuse
    its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice, we affirm the district
    court's order. We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issues
    recently have been decided authoritatively.

    AFFIRMED.

    You might also like