Court Opinion

ID: 2964444
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:25:43.344436+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:11:21.201796
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1647

                                   AARON J. MILLER,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                           MAINE PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT,
                          A/K/A MAINE STATE POLICE, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.
                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                   [Hon. Eugene W. Beaulieu, U.S. Magistrate Judge]
                                             _____________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________
                                 ____________________

            Aaron J. Miller on brief pro se.
            _______________
            Andrew Ketterer, Attorney  General, Paul Stern and Peter J. Brann,
            _______________                     __________     ______________
        Assistant  Attorneys  General, on  brief  for  appellees Maine  Public
        Safety Department, a/k/a  Maine State Police, Dale York, Robert James,
        Robert Ervin,  Walter Chapin, Stanley Cunningham,  Laurie Rackliff and
        John Blagdon.
            Philip M.  Coffin, III,  Thomas  V. Laprade  and Lambert,  Coffin,
            ______________________   __________________      _________________
        Rudman  &  Hochman  on brief  for  appellees  City  of Augusta,  Wayne
        __________________
        McCamish and William Hayward.

                                 ____________________

                                   November 7, 1996
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.  The  judgment is affirmed substantially for
                 __________

            the reasons  recited by  the magistrate-judge in  his May  7,

            1996 memorandum of decision.   Plaintiff's complaint that the

            magistrate-judge  overlooked his  affidavit and  statement of

            disputed facts  is misplaced; those documents were submitted,

            in untimely fashion, only after judgment had issued.  We note

            that plaintiff's  submissions would not call  the magistrate-

            judge's  reasoning  into  question  in any  event.    We have

            considered  the remaining arguments  advanced by plaintiff on

            appeal and find them unavailing. 

                 Affirmed.
                 _________

                                         -2-