Raymond A. Kaminski, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections; Bishoprobinson, Secretary of Public Safety; Captain Pottillo,assistant Unit Manager; Sgt. Myers; Officer Clay; Officerhandy; Officer Vaughan; Officer Wheeler; Officer Kane;john P. Wilt, Warden; Sgt. Pindell; Sgt. Cough; Ms.barthlow, Counselor; Mr. Wells, Counselor; Robert Kokoski;officer C. Kessler; Officer P. Reed; John Doe--1; Johndoe--2; Officer Dorsey; Sgt. John Doe--3; Robert Kowski,defendants-appellees.walter Jefferson, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections; Bishoprobinson, Secretary of Public Safety; Captain Pottillo,assistant Unit Manager; Sgt. Myers; Officer Clay; Officerhandy; Officer Vaughan; Officer Wheeler; Officer Kane;john P. Wilt, Warden; Sgt. Pindell; Sgt. Cough; Ms.barthlow, Counselor; Mr. Wells, Counselor; Robert Kokoski;officer C. Kessler; Officer P. Reed; John Doe--1; Johndoe--2; Officer Dorsey; Sgt. John Doe--3; Robert Kowski,defendants-appellees, 857 F.2d 1469 (4th Cir. 1988)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 857 F.2d 1469 (4th Cir. 1988) Submitted: June 29, 1988. Decided: Aug. 30, 1988

Raymond A. Kaminski, Walter Jefferson, appellants pro se.

Before JAMES DICKSON PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:


In Houston v. Lack, 56 U.S.L.W. 4728 (U.S. June 24, 1988) (No. 87-5428), the Supreme Court held that a prisoner's notice of appeal is to be considered filed when the inmate delivers it to prison officials for forwarding to the district court. We cannot ascertain from the records before us when Kaminski and Jefferson gave their notices of appeal to prison authorities or other federal officials, particularly U.S. post office employees. We accordingly remand these cases to the district court. On remand, that court will obtain this information from the parties, making any necessary evidentiary rulings. The cases, as supplemented, then will be returned to this Court for further consideration.

As the records and other materials before us indicate that it will not significantly aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument.

REMANDED.