# Levy v. Commonwealth of Virginia State Board of Elections

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · October 30, 2002 · 49 F. App'x 448

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1008946

## Case

- **Full name:** Charles William LEVY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 30, 2002
- **Citations:** 49 F. App'x 448
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Widener, Michael, Motz
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1008946

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-1903

CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF
ELECTIONS,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
Judge. (CA-02-283-A)

Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles William Levy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Charles William Levy appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his civil action against the Virginia State Board of

Elections. Our review of the record and the district court’s

opinion adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation discloses no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Levy v. State Bd. of Elections, No. CA-02-283-

A (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 2, 2002 & entered Aug. 6, 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1008946. Public record. Not legal advice.