Court Opinion

ID: 2964866
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:32:23.322452+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:35.262680
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                           UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                ____________________
       No. 97-1541
        
                                  WILLIAM H. MOORE,
                                Plaintiff, Appellant,
                                         v.
                            COUNTY OF WORCESTER, ET AL.,
                               Defendants, Appellees.
                                ____________________
                    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
                  [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]
                                ____________________
                                       Before
                               Torruella, Chief Judge,
                          Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                ____________________
            William H. Moore on brief pro se.
            Edward P. Ryan, Jr.
                               and 
                                   O'Connor & Ryan, P.C.
                                                         on brief for appellee
       Worcester County.
            Scott Harshbarger
                            , Attorney General, and 
                                                    Ellyn H. Lazar
                                                                  , Assistant
       Attorney General, on brief for appellees District Attorney John Conte
       and Assistant District Attorney Joseph Lostracco.
                                ____________________
                                 September 29, 1997
                                ____________________

                      Per Curiam. The filled-in form plaintiff contends
            he returned to the court does not appear in the district court
            record. Consequently, the district court did not err or abuse
            its discretion in assessing a filing fee or denying plaintiff's
            motion to vacate. 
                      The case was properly dismissed under 28 U.S.C. S
            1915(e)(2)(B). 
                      Affirmed.
                                         -2-