The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-7040•Phillip A. Gilliam v. KATE SHELLMAN, Parole Officer
02-7040Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 9, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7040
PHILLIP A. GILLIAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
KATE SHELLMAN, Parole Officer; JOHN DOE; JANE
DOE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CA-02-105-3)
Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 9, 2002
Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Phillip A. Gilliam, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Phillip A. Gilliam appeals the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint
for failure to pay a partial filing fee. We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. Gilliam v. Shellman, No. CA-02-105-3 (E.D. Va. June 21,
2002). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.