Case Name: 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
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-06-06
Citations: 10 F. App'x 239
Docket Number: Nos. 01-1306, 01-1307, 01-1310
Parties: 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.
Judges: Before DIANAN GRIBBON MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 239–240

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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 revers ible 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.