Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Willkommen bei Scribd!

  • Zack v. FCI Morgantown, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Hochgeladen von

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 Ansichten2 Seiten
    William Zack appealed a district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit did not require oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court documents. The Fourth Circuit upheld the district court's decision to deny William Zack's motion for reconsideration.

    Originalbeschreibung:

    Filed: 1996-06-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-8581

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Verfügbare Formate

    PDF oder online auf Scribd lesen

    Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

    Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

    Dieses Dokument melden
    William Zack appealed a district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit did not require oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court documents. The Fourth Circuit upheld the district court's decision to deny William Zack's motion for reconsideration.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Als PDF herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    4 Ansichten2 Seiten

    Zack v. FCI Morgantown, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Hochgeladen von

    Scribd Government Docs
    William Zack appealed a district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit did not require oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court documents. The Fourth Circuit upheld the district court's decision to deny William Zack's motion for reconsideration.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Als PDF herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    von 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-8581

    WILLIAM D. ZACK,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE - MORGANTOWN,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, District
    Judge. (CA-94-178)
    Submitted:

    June 20, 1996

    Decided:

    June 28, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William D. Zack, Appellant Pro Se.
    Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr.,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his
    motion for reconsideration. 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. Zack v. FCI
    Morgantown, No. CA-94-178 (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 1, 1995). 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

    Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen