Bakalis v. Rutkovskis

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

September 12, 1996      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________


No. 96-1637



                                   GEORGE BAKALIS,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                      GUNARS RUTKOVSKIS, ELIZABETH R. O'DONNELL

                                AND PETER M. LAURIAT,



                                Defendants, Appellees.



                                 ___________________


APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________



                                 ____________________



            George Bakalis on brief pro se.
            ______________


____________________


____________________



Per Curiam.  We affirm the dismissal of plaintiff's
                      __________



            action for the  reasons stated in the district  court's April



            3, 1996 memorandum and order.   For the reasons stated by the



            district court, we can not review the state court's dismissal



            of plaintiff's action.   As for plaintiff's allegations about



            the  library's refusal  to  accept his  papers  and the  city



            attorney's actions,  they do  not state  any claim for  which



            relief may be granted in a federal court.



                      Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.
                      ________


-2-