Court Opinion

ID: 2964401
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:25:07.290336+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:11:09.707717
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1385

                                 FRED L. MURRAY, JR.,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                               TRANS UNION CORPORATION,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                    [Hon. Richard G. Stearns, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Cyr and Stahl, 
                                    Circuit Judges.
                                    ______________

                                 ____________________

            Fred L. Murray on brief pro se.
            ______________
            Mark E.  Kogan,  Bruce S.  Luckman,  Marion,  Satzberg, Trichon  &
            ______________   _________________   _____________________________
        Kogan, P.C. and Robinson & Cole on brief for appellee.
        ___________     _______________

                                 ____________________

                                   December 3, 1996
                                 ___________________

                 Per Curiam.  Pro  se plaintiff Fred L. Murray  appeals a
                 __________   ___  __

            district  court  order  that  granted  defendant Trans  Union

            Corporation  summary  judgment   on  Murray's  complaint  for

            violations  of the  Fair Credit Reporting  Act, 15  U.S.C.   

            1681e(b) and  1681i(a) and (c), the  Equal Credit Opportunity

            Act, 15 U.S.C.    1691-1691f, and various common  law claims.

            This  court  has  thoroughly  reviewed  the  record  and  the

            parties'  claims on appeal.   We agree  that summary judgment

            was properly entered for  the reasons stated in the  district

            court's memorandum and order.1   Accordingly, the judgment of
                                         1

            the  district court  is  summarily affirmed.  See Local  Rule
                                     _________ ________   ___

            27.1.   Murray's motion for  sanctions, motion to  compel and

            continue  discovery,  and  motion  to  amend  district  court

            complaint and add supplemental pleading are denied.
                                                        ______

                                
            ____________________

               1 We add that the record fails to establish a violation of
               1
            15 U.S.C.  1681i.

                                         -2-