Notice: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 States Unpublished Opinions May Be Cited Only in Related Cases.scott W. Veale and David T. Veale, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. State of New Hampshire, Defendant, Appellee, 966 F.2d 1440 (1st Cir. 1992)
Annotate this CaseScott W. Veale on brief pro se.
David T. Veale on brief pro se.
John P. Arnold, Attorney General, and David S. Peck, Senior Assistant Attorney General, on Memorandum of Law.
Before Breyer, Chief Judge, Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam.
After carefully reviewing appellants' brief and the record, we affirm the judgment of the district court for essentially the reasons stated in the Order dated July 10, 1991 and in the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge dated March 11, 1991. Because both opinions clearly set out the reasons why appellants failed to state a claim, we see no reason to repeat them here.
Affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
