Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    13 views2 pages
    Marie McMahon appealed a district court's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The appeals court agreed with the district court's reasoning for dismissing the complaint and some defendants. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials available to the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1990-10-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 914 F.2d 248 Docket: 89-2840

    Original Title

    Marie M. McMahon Pro Se, Individually and on Behalf of All Persons Similarly Situated v. Charles S. Trump, Iv, J. Phillip Kesecker, Harleigh E. Seely, Lisa M. Gruber, R. Eldon Metzger, Stephen C. McBee David H. Savasten, Grace Borrell, David Hall, Mary Gano Parrill, Melissa K. Marland, Public Service Commission, Thomas W. Steptoe, Jr., Andrew M. Frye, Jr., C. Reeves Taylor, Richard Gay, 914 F.2d 248, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Marie McMahon appealed a district court's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The appeals court agreed with the district court's reasoning for dismissing the complaint and some defendants. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials available to the court.

    Copyright:

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

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Marie McMahon appealed a district court's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The appeals court agreed with the district court's reasoning for dismissing the complaint and some defendants. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials available to the court.

    Copyright:

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

    914 F.

    2d 248
    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.
    Marie M. McMAHON, pro se, individually and on behalf of all
    persons similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Charles S. TRUMP, IV, J. Phillip Kesecker, Harleigh E.
    Seely, Lisa M. Gruber, R. Eldon Metzger, Stephen C. McBee,
    David H. Savasten, Grace Borrell, David Hall, Mary Gano
    Parrill, Melissa K. Marland, Public Service Commission,
    Thomas W. Steptoe, Jr., Andrew M. Frye, Jr., C. Reeves
    Taylor, Richard Gay, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 89-2840.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Dec. 29, 1989.
    Decided Sept. 17, 1990.
    Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied Oct. 12, 1990.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of
    West Virginia, at Martinsburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge.
    (C/A No. 89-20-M-K)
    Marie M. McMahon, appellant pro se.
    Charles F. Printz, Jr., Rice, Douglas & Shingleton, Martinsburg, W.Va.,
    Franklin Dorrah Cleckley, Morgantown, W.Va., William B. Carey,
    Berkeley Springs, W.Va., David Paul Cleek, Charleston, W.Va., for
    appellees.
    N.D.W.Va.

    AFFIRMED.
    Before K.K. HALL, MURNAGHAN and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Marie M. McMahon appeals from the district court's order denying relief under
    42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983.* Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
    discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. McMahon v. Trump, C/A No. 89-20-M-K
    (N.D.W.Va. Oct. 3, 1989; Jan. 17, 1990; Jan. 30, 1990). 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.

    In her "Amended Notice of Appeal" filed on February 7, 1990, McMahon has


    apparently abandoned her appeal from both the October 3, 1989, order granting
    the motion to dismiss the complaint as a class action and the October 20, 1989,
    order denying her motion for reconsideration of the court's October 3, 1989,
    orders dismissing some of the defendants from the action

    You might also like