Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Copeland v. Arthur, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Delbert Thomas Copeland's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court had dismissed the complaint for Copeland's failure to comply with a court order. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The dismissal was without prejudice, so Copeland could refile his complaint if he paid the required filing fee.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-10-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-6806

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Delbert Thomas Copeland's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court had dismissed the complaint for Copeland's failure to comply with a court order. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The dismissal was without prejudice, so Copeland could refile his complaint if he paid the required filing fee.

    Copyright:

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

    Copeland v. Arthur, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Delbert Thomas Copeland's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court had dismissed the complaint for Copeland's failure to comply with a court order. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The dismissal was without prejudice, so Copeland could refile his complaint if he paid the required filing fee.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 08-6806

    DELBERT THOMAS COPELAND,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    BETH ARTHUR, Sheriff; KEVIN POPE, Deputy; FOSTER LINCOLN,
    Deputy,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-00473-RAJ-TEM)

    Submitted:

    August 28, 2008

    Decided:

    October 14, 2008

    Before MICHAEL and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Delbert Thomas Copeland, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Delbert Thomas Copeland appeals the district courts
    order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000)
    complaint for failure to comply with a court order.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

    Copeland v.

    Arthur, No. 2:07-cv-00473-RAJ-TEM (E.D. Va. Apr. 22, 2008).*

    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 note that because the district courts dismissal was


    without prejudice, Copeland may refile his complaint and pay the
    requisite filing fee. We express no opinion on the timeliness or
    the merits of the original complaint or any complaint Copeland may
    choose to file in the future.
    2

    You might also like