Opinion

Steve Wool v. William Hinkel Barbara Zentz Joseph P. Murphy Janet A. Brown Stanley Friedler

  • 833 F.2d 1006
  • 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 15487
  • 1987 WL 39076
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Nov 25, 1987
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

833 F.2d 1006

Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Steve WOOL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

William HINKEL; Barbara Zentz; Joseph P. Murphy; Janet A.

Brown; Stanley Friedler, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-1165.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Nov. 25, 1987.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, CHAPMAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Steve Wool, appellant pro se.

PER CURIAM:

1

A review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal from that court's order dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without merit. Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the district court. Wool v. Hinkel, C/A No. 87-1896-H (D.Md. Aug. 4, 1987).

2

AFFIRMED.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.