Tucker v. Department of the Navy, Charleston Naval Shipyard/Agency

98 F.3d 1335, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 40089, 1996 WL 578682
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 9, 1996
Docket96-1420
StatusUnpublished

This text of 98 F.3d 1335 (Tucker v. Department of the Navy, Charleston Naval Shipyard/Agency) 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
Tucker v. Department of the Navy, Charleston Naval Shipyard/Agency, 98 F.3d 1335, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 40089, 1996 WL 578682 (4th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

98 F.3d 1335

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Loyless B. TUCKER; Delmont L. Thompson, Sr.; John E.
Smith; Frank Simmons, Jr., Plaintiffs-Appellants,
and
Orris Caldwell, Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Charleston Naval Shipyard/Agency,
Defendant--Appellee.

No. 96-1420.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 3, 1996.
Decided Oct. 9, 1996.

Loyless B. Tucker, Delmont L. Thompson, Sr., John E. Smith, Frank Simmons, Jr., Appellants Pro Se. OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order dismissing their civil action as barred. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tucker v. Department of the Navy, No. CA-95-2234-18AJ (D.S.C. Mar. 6, 1996). 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.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
98 F.3d 1335, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 40089, 1996 WL 578682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-department-of-the-navy-charleston-naval-shipyardagency-ca4-1996.