Owens v. Pearson

25 F.3d 1040, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20805, 1994 WL 197093
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 18, 1994
Docket94-6041
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1040 (Owens v. Pearson) 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
Owens v. Pearson, 25 F.3d 1040, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20805, 1994 WL 197093 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1040
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Joseph Anthony OWENS, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Eddie L. PEARSON, Warden; Patricia A. Edge, Assistant
Warden; Calvin D. Brown, Chief of Security;
George E. Giles, Sr., Correctional
Officer, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6041.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 21, 1994.
Decided: May 18, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-93-443)

Joseph Anthony Owens, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. 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 on the recommendation of the magistrate judge when Appellant failed to timely comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to appeal in forma pauperis and dismiss the 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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1040, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20805, 1994 WL 197093, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owens-v-pearson-ca4-1994.