Court Opinion

ID: 2964253
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:22:50.082343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:45.228420
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          July 9, 1996          [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

          No. 96-1057

                                RICHARD A. COLE, M.D.,

                                     Petitioner,

                                          v.

                               THOMAS J. WEADOCK, JR.,
                               Chief Probation Officer,
                           U.S. District of Massachusetts,

                                     Respondent.
                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

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

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                               Selya, Boudin and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

               Richard A. Cole, M.D. F.A.C.P. on brief pro se.
               ______________________________
               Donald K. Stern, United  States Attorney, and Jeffry Fowley,
               _______________                               _____________
          Special   Assistant  United   States  Attorney,   on   brief  for
          respondent.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   We have considered the parties' briefs and
                 __________

            the  record on appeal.  We affirm essentially for the reasons

            stated in the magistrate  judge's report and  recommendation,

            dated November  14, 1995, which  was accepted and  adopted by

            the district court in an order, dated  November 30, 1995.  In

            addition,  we  find  neither  error   of  law  nor  abuse  of

            discretion in  the  district court's  denial  of  appellant's

            subsequent motion filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).

                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. R. 27.1.
                 _________  ___