Court Opinion

ID: 2965015
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:12.553179+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:45.999229
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            United States Court of Appeals
                                For the First Circuit
                                 ____________________

          No. 97-1934

                                  WILLIAM J. POLIS,

                                Plaintiff - Appellant,

                                          v.

                                WILLIAM WELD, ET AL.,

                               Defendants - Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                               Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                          ___________

                          Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                _____________________

               Paul S. Hughes for appellant.
               ______________
               Lucy  A. Wall, Assistant  Attorney General, with  whom Scott
               _____________                                          _____
          Harshbarger, Attorney General, was on brief for appellee.
          ___________

                                 ____________________

                                  December 18, 1997
                                 ____________________

                    Per Curiam.   After full consideration of  the parties'
                    Per Curiam
                    ___________

          briefs and the  record provided for our review,  we conclude that

          the  district  court  properly  granted the  defendant-appellees'

          motion to dismiss under Fed. R.  Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure  to

          state a claim  upon which relief could be granted.  We reach this

          conclusion substantially for  the reasons stated by  the district

          court.    Affirmed.   See  1st  Cir.  Loc.  R. 27.1.    Costs  to
                    ________    ___

          appellees.  Fed. R. App. P. 39(a).

                                         -2-