Court Opinion

ID: 2964950
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:33:19.684366+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:12:10.730344
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1241

                               KENNETH HOWARD, ET AL.,

                               Plaintiffs, Appellants,

                                          v.

                    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, WATER RESOURCES BOARD,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                     [Hon. Ernest C. Torres, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________
                           Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                     ____________________
                              and Lynch, Circuit Judge.
                                         _____________

                                 ____________________

            John  W.  Dineen  and  Yesser,  Glasson  &  Dineen  on  brief  for
            ________________       ___________________________
        appellants.
            Jeffrey   B.  Pine,   Attorney   General,  and   Rebecca   Tedford
            __________________                               _________________
        Partington, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellee.
        __________

                                 ____________________

                                   October 14, 1997
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.    Upon careful  review  of the  briefs  and
                 __________

            record, we conclude  that appellants' complaint properly  was

            dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state

            a claim and that their motion to amend the complaint properly

            was  denied  as  futile.    We  reach  this   conclusion  for

            substantially the same  reasons stated by the  district court

            in its Memorandum and Order dated December 31, 1996.  

                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________   ___

                                         -2-