Michael C. Antonelli v. Eduardo Gonzalez, Director, United States Marshals Service

73 F.3d 356, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40375, 1995 WL 756326
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 21, 1995·No. 95-7068·Published

Opinion

73 F.3d 356
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Michael C. ANTONELLI, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Eduardo GONZALEZ, Director, United States Marshals Service,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-7068.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 16, 1995.
Decided: December 21, 1995.

Michael C. Antonelli, Appellant Pro Se.

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his petition for mandamus relief. The district court assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We also deny as moot Appellant's motion for release on bond pending appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

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

Michael C. Antonelli v. Eduardo Gonzalez, Director, United States Marshals Service, 73 F.3d 356, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40375, 1995 WL 756326 (4th Cir. 1995).

73 F.3d 356 (Michael C. Antonelli v. Eduardo Gonzalez, Director, United States Marshals Service) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Evans v. Croom
650 F.2d 521 (Fourth Circuit, 1981)