Steven Lamb v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999581151-2] Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999644811]. Mailed to: appellant. [15-6464]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6464 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6464 STEVEN PREVONCE LAMB, Petitioner – Appellant, v. HAROLD CLARKE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB) Submitted: August 18, 2015 Decided: August 21, 2015 Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven Prevonce Lamb, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6464 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Steven Prevonce Lamb appeals the district court’s order dismissing this action without prejudice because of the absence of a case or controversy. no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Lamb v. Clarke, No. 1:15-cv-00268-CMH-TCB (E.D. 2015). Va. Mar. 20, We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?