Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    William Echard appealed the district court's order dismissing the federal defendants from his suit and remanding the case to state court. The Fourth Circuit denied Echard's motion for a stay of the district court proceedings pending appeal for two reasons: 1) Echard failed to first request a stay from the district court, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; and 2) Echard did not demonstrate that he was entitled to a stay under the applicable legal standard. The Fourth Circuit denied the motion without oral argument, concluding the issues were adequately addressed in the submitted materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1992-02-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 955 F.2d 40 Docket: 91-1080

    Original Title

    William B. Echard v. U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Jim Wist, Agent, and Anne Arundel County Department of Inspections & Permits Leroy Jonus Damon Cogar George Klug James Thomas Mike Evans, Agents State of Maryland Department of Environment Sediment and Stormwater Administration Martin W. Walsh H. Earl Shaver Chris Westergard Frank Payer, Agents Cheval Trails Homeowners Gary Probsts Gradon Ripley, Agents, 955 F.2d 40, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    William Echard appealed the district court's order dismissing the federal defendants from his suit and remanding the case to state court. The Fourth Circuit denied Echard's motion for a stay of the district court proceedings pending appeal for two reasons: 1) Echard failed to first request a stay from the district court, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; and 2) Echard did not demonstrate that he was entitled to a stay under the applicable legal standard. The Fourth Circuit denied the motion without oral argument, concluding the issues were adequately addressed in the submitted materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    5 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    William Echard appealed the district court's order dismissing the federal defendants from his suit and remanding the case to state court. The Fourth Circuit denied Echard's motion for a stay of the district court proceedings pending appeal for two reasons: 1) Echard failed to first request a stay from the district court, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; and 2) Echard did not demonstrate that he was entitled to a stay under the applicable legal standard. The Fourth Circuit denied the motion without oral argument, concluding the issues were adequately addressed in the submitted materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    955 F.

    2d 40

    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 B. ECHARD, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL
    CONSERVATION SERVICE;
    Jim Wist, Agent, Defendants-Appellees,
    and
    Anne Arundel County Department of Inspections & Permits;
    Leroy Jonus; Damon Cogar; George Klug; James Thomas;
    Mike Evans, Agents; State of Maryland Department of
    Environment Sediment and Stormwater Administration;
    Martin
    W. Walsh; H. Earl Shaver; Chris Westergard; Frank Payer,
    Agents; Cheval Trails Homeowners; Gary Probsts; Gradon
    Ripley, Agents, Defendants.
    No. 91-1080.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Sept. 27, 1991.
    Decided Feb. 10, 1992.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. M.J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-90-1138-MJG)
    D.Md.
    DENIED.
    William B. Echard, appellant pro se.

    Robert Mason Thomas, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney,


    Baltimore, Md for appellees.
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:

    William B. Echard has moved for a stay of proceedings in the district court
    pending his appeal of the district court's order dismissing the federal defendants
    from his suit and remanding his case to state court. Echard has failed to comply
    with Fed.R.App.P. 8(a), which requires application for a stay to be made first in
    the district court. Further, Echard has not shown that he is entitled to such a stay
    under the test set out in Long v. Robinson, 432 F.2d 977, 979 (4th Cir.1970).

    The motion for stay is therefore denied. 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.

    MOTION DENIED.

    You might also like