Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    L. Ruther v. ACLU VA, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Lawrence Ruther appealed a district court order that found his filed document to be indecipherable and treated it as a miscellaneous matter, closing the case without further action. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Ruther leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. 3) The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit does not constitute binding precedent.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    L. Ruther v. ACLU VA, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    1) Lawrence Ruther appealed a district court order that found his filed document to be indecipherable and treated it as a miscellaneous matter, closing the case without further action. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Ruther leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. 3) The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit does not constitute binding precedent.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-12-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-1979

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Lawrence Ruther appealed a district court order that found his filed document to be indecipherable and treated it as a miscellaneous matter, closing the case without further action. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Ruther leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. 3) The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit does not constitute binding precedent.

    Copyright:

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

    L. Ruther v. ACLU VA, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Lawrence Ruther appealed a district court order that found his filed document to be indecipherable and treated it as a miscellaneous matter, closing the case without further action. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Ruther leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. 3) The unpublished opinion from the Fourth Circuit does not constitute binding precedent.

    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. 14-1979

    L. RUTHER, Pequot Nation,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF VIRGINIA,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Leonie M. Brinkema,
    District Judge. (1:14-mc-00026-LMB-TRJ)

    Submitted:

    December 18, 2014

    Decided:

    December 22, 2014

    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lawrence Ruther, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    L. Ruther appeals the district courts order finding
    his

    document

    miscellaneous
    action.
    error.
    and

    filed

    was

    matter,

    and

    indecipherable,
    closing

    the

    treating

    matter

    it

    without

    as

    further

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible


    Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis

    dismiss

    for

    the

    reasons

    stated

    by

    the

    district

    court.

    Ruther v. Am. Civil Liberties Union, No. 1:14-mc-00026-LMB-TRJ


    (E.D.

    Va.

    Sept.

    3,

    2014).

    We

    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented


    in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
    the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like