Camoscio v. Commonwealth of Mass
Case Date: 03/23/1993
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 92-2386
|
March 23, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ___________________ No. 92-2386 FRANK J. CAMOSCIO, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AND THE BOARD OF REGISTRATION IN PODIATRY, Defendants, Appellees. __________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ___________________ Before Torruella, Cyr and Boudin Circuit Judges. ______________ ___________________ Frank J. Camoscio on brief pro se. _________________ Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, and Beth D. Levi, __________________ ______________ Assistant Attorney General, on Memorandum in Support of the Motion for Summary Affirmance for appellees. __________________ __________________ Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record in this __________ case and are persuaded that this action, the appellant's third against the defendant Board of Registration in Podiatry, is frivolous, vexatious, and barred by res ___ judicata, the Rooker doctrine, and the statute of ________ ______ limitations. See Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, ___ ______ __________________ 416 (1923); Street v. Vose, 936 F.2d 38 (1st Cir. 1991)(per ______ ____ curiam). Accordingly, the appellees' motion for summary disposition is allowed and the judgment dismissing the instant complaint is affirmed. We further affirm the district court's order enjoining the appellant from filing any further actions without either obtaining leave of court or the aid and signature of counsel. -2- |