Court Opinion

ID: 2963667
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:13:43.768658+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:09.293401
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

        September 14, 1995      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                   

                                 ____________________

        No. 94-1856 

                                 ARTHUR J. TOEGEMANN,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              CITY OF CRANSTON, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                 [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                         __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge
                                           ___________
                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Arthur J. Toegemann on brief pro se.
            ___________________
            William  F. Holt, Assistant City Solicitor, on  brief for appellee
            ________________
        City of Cranston.
            Seth E. Bowerman and Hanson, Curran, Parks  & Whitman on brief for
            ________________     ________________________________
        appellees Saratoga Hospital and Butler Hospital.
            Joseph A.  Keough, Jr.,  Francis X. Flaherty  and Wynn  & Wynn  on
            ______________________   ___________________      ____________
        brief for appellee Peter Palombo, Jr.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

             

                 Per  Curiam.  Upon review of the record and the parties'
                 ___________

            briefs  on appeal, we are persuaded that the district court's

            order  was  fully justified  by  the  plaintiff's history  of

            filing  meritless   actions  against   many   of  the   named

            defendants.  Accordingly, the  judgment of the district court

            is affirmed.  See Local Rule 27.1.  Costs to appellees.
               ________   ___

                                         -2-