Steinberg v. Harris

Fourth Circuit

Steinberg v. Harris

54 F.3d 774, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17532, 1995 WL 311605

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 22, 1995

Docket95-1308

StatusPublished

This text of 54 F.3d 774 (Steinberg v. Harris) 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

Steinberg v. Harris, 54 F.3d 774, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17532, 1995 WL 311605 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

54 F.3d 774
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Murray L. STEINBERG, In behalf of himself and all those
similarly situated; Chelsea Renee Steinberg, By
her next friend and natural father,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Lee A. HARRIS, Jr., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-1308.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 20, 1995.
Decided May 22, 1995.

Murray L. Steinberg, appellant pro se.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against a Virginia circuit court judge in which he asserts various constitutional violations and an invasion of privacy. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Steinberg v. Harris, No. CA-95-107-R (E.D. Va. Feb. 6, 1995).* 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.

AFFIRMED

*

We also deny Appellant's motion for injunctive relief

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

54 F.3d 774
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Murray L. STEINBERG, In behalf of himself and all those
similarly situated; Chelsea Renee Steinberg, By
her next friend and natural father,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Lee A. HARRIS, Jr., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-1308.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 20, 1995.
Decided May 22, 1995.

Murray L. Steinberg, appellant pro se.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint against a Virginia circuit court judge in which he asserts various constitutional violations and an invasion of privacy. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Steinberg v. Harris, No. CA-95-107-R (E.D. Va. Feb. 6, 1995).* 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.

AFFIRMED

*

We also deny Appellant's motion for injunctive relief

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 F.3d 774, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17532, 1995 WL 311605, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steinberg-v-harris-ca4-1995.