Rauh v. Daniels

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

August 11, 1993

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

No. 93-1634

                                GEORGE K. RAUH, ETC.,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                                ROBERT DANIELS, ETC.,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

[Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Cyr, Boudin and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

George K. Rauh on brief pro se.
            ______________
            John C. Boeckeler  and Roussos, Hage &  Hodes on Memorandum of Law
            _________________      ______________________
        in Support of Motion for Summary Dismissal of Appeal, for appellee.

____________________

____________________

Per Curiam.  The judgment of dismissal is  affirmed
                      __________

            substantially for the reasons stated by the magistrate  judge

            and district court.

                      Affirmed.
                      ________