Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Matchem v. Runyon, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished appellate court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Diane Matchem and the Postmaster General. The district court had dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Matchem v. Runyon, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished appellate court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Diane Matchem and the Postmaster General. The district court had dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-02-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-2794

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished appellate court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Diane Matchem and the Postmaster General. The district court had dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views2 pages

    Matchem v. Runyon, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-sentence summary of an unpublished appellate court decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case between Diane Matchem and the Postmaster General. The district court had dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-2794

    DIANE MATCHEM, and Diane Matchem for William


    Matchem,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MARVIN RUNYON, Postmaster
    States Postal Service,

    General,

    United
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District
    Judge. (CA-92-56-3-MU)
    Submitted:

    February 3, 1998

    Decided:

    February 24, 1998

    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Diane Matchem, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing this
    action with prejudice for failure to prosecute. We have reviewed
    the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court. Matchem v. Runyon, No. CA-92-56-3-MU (W.D.N.C. Nov. 22,
    1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like