Case ID: f-appx_10/html/0239-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Arthur O. ARMSTRONG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Defendant-Appellee. Arthur O. Armstrong, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William L. Osteen, Defendant-Appellee. Arthur O. Armstrong, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William L. Osteen; Herbert J. Hutton, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 01-1306, 01-1307, 01-1310.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 24, 2001.
    Decided June 6, 2001.
    Arthur O. Armstrong, pro se.
    Before DIANAN GRIBBON MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Arthur O. Armstrong appeals a district court order denying his motions for leave to file complaints. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Armstrong’s motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for summary judgment and dismiss the appeals as frivolous. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.