Denrick Eric Brown v. David A. William D. R. Guillory Layton T. Lester C. N. Lewis

Fourth Circuit

Denrick Eric Brown v. David A. William D. R. Guillory Layton T. Lester C. N. Lewis

32 F.3d 562, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 28889, 1994 WL 423990

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 15, 1994

Docket94-6590

StatusUnpublished

This text of 32 F.3d 562 (Denrick Eric Brown v. David A. William D. R. Guillory Layton T. Lester C. N. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Denrick Eric Brown v. David A. William D. R. Guillory Layton T. Lester C. N. Lewis, 32 F.3d 562, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 28889, 1994 WL 423990 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

32 F.3d 562

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Denrick Eric BROWN, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
David A. WILLIAM; D. R. Guillory; Layton T. Lester; C. N.
Lewis, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6590.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 19, 1994
Decided: August 15, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CA-92-1191-AM)

Denrick Eric Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Before HALL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Denrick Brown appeals the dismissal of his complaint for failure to pay a court-ordered partial filing fee. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, reverse, and remand.

The district court imposed a partial filing fee in excess of 20% of the aggregate amount deposited in Appellant's account in the six months prior to submission of the complaint. This assessment violated Local Rule 28(C) for the Eastern District of Virginia, which only permits a partial filing fee "not in excess of 20% of the aggregate deposits" in the preceding six months. See Ortega v. Geelhaar, 914 F.2d 495, 498 (4th Cir.1990) (district court must abide by local rules adopted by court).

Accordingly, we reverse the order of dismissal and remand with instructions to recalculate the partial filing fee in accordance with Local Rule 28(C). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

REVERSED AND REMANDED

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