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)
05-7516•William M. Finn v. Lieutenant Spiker
05-7516Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 2, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7516
WILLIAM M. FINN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LIEUTENANT SPIKER; SERGEANT HICKS; LIEUTENANT
MOORE; CAPTAIN D. FLIPPEN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-05-542-3)
Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 2, 2006
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William M. Finn, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
William M. Finn appeals the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action for
failure to comply with a court order regarding filing fees. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Finn v. Spiker, No. CA-05-542-3 (E.D. Va. Sept. 13, 2005). We dis-
pense 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.