Dennis Lee Maxberry v. The True Church of Jesus Christ the Bethlehem Temple

842 F.2d 332, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3684, 1988 WL 25435
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedMarch 25, 1988
Docket87-3486
StatusUnpublished

This text of 842 F.2d 332 (Dennis Lee Maxberry v. The True Church of Jesus Christ the Bethlehem Temple) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dennis Lee Maxberry v. The True Church of Jesus Christ the Bethlehem Temple, 842 F.2d 332, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3684, 1988 WL 25435 (6th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

842 F.2d 332

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Dennis Lee MAXBERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST; the Bethlehem Temple,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-3486.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 25, 1988.

Before NATHANIEL R. JONES and RALPH B. GUY, Jr., Circuit Judges, and CONTIE, Senior Circuit Judge.

ORDER

This pro se Ohio plaintiff appeals the district court's judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The appeal has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon consideration of the record and plaintiff's brief, the panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

Seeking funds to provide a Sunday smorgasbord for the homeless, plaintiff filed his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Plaintiff appears to have alleged improprieties by certain of his relatives who are members of defendant churches. The district court dismissed the complaint as frivolous.

Upon review, we conclude that dismissal under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(d) was proper. Accordingly, the judgment of dismissal is hereby affirmed for the reasons stated by the district court. Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
842 F.2d 332, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3684, 1988 WL 25435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dennis-lee-maxberry-v-the-true-church-of-jesus-christ-the-bethlehem-temple-ca6-1988.